* Travel Study Program of Tourism Faculty of Udayana University, E-mail: Balisuar.email@example.com
AN EXAMINATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP AMONG
MOTIVATION, SATISFACTION, TRUST, AND
I. Wayan Suardana*
Abstract: The main aim of this research is to examine satisfaction and trust as mediation that related to motivation and loyalty. Researcher used Stratified Random Sampling for this research, with totally 250 qualified respondents and they were taken from diving area in Bali. The respondents must be foreign tourists who have been diving more than once in marine tourist objects around Bali. Based on data analytics method which was used in this research, that is Structural Equation Modeling (SEM), the result shows that there are direct and indirect influences between intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, satisfaction, and trust toward product loyalty. Satisfaction has been proven being full mediator variable that is related to extrinsic motivation and trust. Meanwhile, trust is being mediator for satisfaction and product loyalty. Tourist motivation becomes a strong predictor from loyalty. It’s not only able increasing loyalty, but could also build satisfaction level and tourists trust.
Keywords: intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, satisfaction, trust and product loyalty
Decision making by tourist is a very important aspect in tourist behavior, as it is used as basic reason whether tourist will buy the products or not. Their behavior in making decision based on many things, such as motivation, experience and expectation to visited destination (Swarbrooke and Horner, 2007:74). Various options of tourism products are emerging as product diversification, resulting in difficulty of the marketer to maintain its position as a tourist destination choice. At the same time, destinations and products appear to offer lower prices with better qualities. Along with these, managers realize the importance of improving the intrinsic understanding, satisfaction and loyalty tourist as valuable information for the sustainability of tourism businesses.
2896 � I. Wayan Suardana
2005). Motivational approaches are the basic concepts in psychology, because it is seen as a tendency of all the tourists who make purchases based on the initial motive and opinion on individuals who are permanently avoid something unwanted/unpleasant and look for the desired/fun (Hasan, 2015: 366). In tourism, tourist motives dynamics will provide a different experience and satisfaction in accordance with the motivation, the situation, as well as the tourists have perceived at the destinations. One of the theories that can explain the relation between motivation and satisfaction is Self Determination Theory (Schuler, Sheldon, and Frohlich, 2010). Deci and Ryan (1985) have developed Self Determination Theory to probe how different motivation type resulting different self determination level. This theory is one of important multidimensional framework, that addresses issues of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. This theory explains that someone’s strong intention in an action can be seen with real action to predict and identify the behaviors (Schuler, Sheldon and Frohlich, 2010). Intrinsic motivation refers to motivation that comes from inside an individual, which is shown when someone is interested to do any activities, feels comfortable while doing it and based on sincerity. Extrinsic motivation refers to motivation that comes from outside an individual. The motivating factors are external, or outside, rewards such as money or grades. These rewards provide satisfaction and pleasure that the task itself may not provide. Tourist will realize his motivation to get satisfaction (Vallerand, 2004). Motivation that comes from inside an individual, especially intrinsic motivation can bring satisfaction for him when he shares his knowledge with the others (Gagne and Deci, 2005). According Stiglbauer, Gnambs and Gamsjager (2011), motivation effects individual trust to an object.
An Examination of the Relationship among Motivation, Satisfaction... �2897
change in the field of marketing (O’Malley and Tynan, 2000). Relationship marketing theory gives an understanding, that provide different services for tourists and provide benefits of other relationships are believed to increase consumer’s trust (Garbarino and Johnson, 1999; Franco, 2009). Trust is one of the variables for the development of relations in the relational marketing paradigm (Morgan and Hunt 1994). In this perspective, satisfaction does not have a significant effect on loyalty (Garbarino and Johnson, 1999). So, in building product loyalty, the satisfaction is the entry point and continued by travelers trust. Customers should be encouraged to delight zone, where customers feel happy or excited that will lead to a strong trust and loyalty (Gnot, Bigne and Andrru (2006 : 258-259). However, in its development, satisfaction is not enough, when the tourists get another stimulus that can change the repurchase decision. A strong trust is needed, so that tourists still buy a desired product (Careres and Paparoidamis 2007; Sirdeshmukh, et al. 2002; Kim, et al. 2011).
The variation of empirical studies on the relationship between the variables of motivation, satisfaction and loyalty, encouraging the need for research on the tourist loyalty mediated by trust. Previous research in tourism has been approached with the concept of loyalty to the tourist destination from the perspective of the intention to repeat visits and recommend the destination to friends or relatives, but rule out the effect of relationship marketing (trust) and the value of the destinations that form of loyalty (Niininem, et al. 2004; Li and Petrick, 2010; Forgas, et al. 2012). In addition, to fully understand the tourist loyalty, also required a deep understanding of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (Yoon and Uysal, 2005; Kim, Lee, and Klenosky, 2003; Ryan and Deci, 2000). While previous studies have shown the effect performed by nationality in the decision to come back, none identify motivation in influencing satisfaction and trust as antecedent’s loyalty. To fill the gaps that exist in the literature, it is proposed to develop a theoretical model which will allow explaining the relationship between extrinsic motivation, intrinsic motivation, to satisfaction, trust and loyalty of its influence on the product.Analysis of tourist behavior of the various variables above can assist managers in making policies destinations, tourism structures, and infrastructure to become stronger and more competitive. While the managers and marketers can build a more creative marketing and determine tourists segments, which require special attention before making strategic interventions. Tourist behavior, particularly in the purchasing decision back, providing a comprehensive understanding and deepening of the relationship marketing theory and construct theories of behavior in tourism.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW AND RESEARCH MODEL
2898 � I. Wayan Suardana
of the trip, providing quality service to improve tourist’s satisfaction (Beggs and Elkins, 2012; Swarbrooke and Horner, 2007). The satisfaction of tourists will be able to influence the buying behavior of tourists in the future. Moreover, supported by the fact that there is competition in providing tourist destination, it is important to establish and maintain the actual travelers become loyal travelers. This is what underlies the importance of understanding the role of motivation and satisfaction in the relationship in growing loyalty. Here is described the variables and the relationships between variables, that make up the conceptual relationship in this study, namely:
(a) Intrinsic Motivation
An Examination of the Relationship among Motivation, Satisfaction... �2899
used to explain the desire of traveling that encourage travelers to leave home and look for a vacation destination. More specifically, it is shown, that there is a positive impact on tourist satisfaction in doing visits (Vallerand, 2010, Schuler, et al., 2010; Lee and Liu, 2009; Ryan and Decy, 1985). Thus, intrinsic motivation is motivation that can make a person wants to travel in order to get satisfaction, and intending to repeat the activity in the future (Yoon and Uysal, 2005; Kouthouris, 2009). Based on above hypothesis, it can be hypothesized as follows:
H1: The higher the intrinsic motivation of tourists, the higher tourist satisfaction. H2: The higher the intrinsic motivation of tourist, the higher the loyalty of
(b) Extrinsic Motivation
Extrinsic motivation is motivation that is influenced by the properties that exist in the sights. Together with a driving factor, extrinsic motivation requires special attention, because this factor aims to determine the choice of product to be purchased. Crompton (1979) identified two indicators that have become decisive in this motivation. Both indicators are novelty and education. Yoon and Uysal (2003) found that extrinsic motivation has positive effect on tourist satisfaction and provide a direct effect on the tourist loyalty. The driving factors at once will cause extrinsic motivation be awakened and affect tourist satisfaction.
Extrinsic motivation is very important influence to the level of tourist satisfaction and confidence. Product loyalty arises when the response and attitude towards the satisfaction and trust becomes negative (Joynathsing adan Ramkissoon, 2010). The main reasons of this opinion are the dominant influence of external motivation to satisfaction. Other studies supporting the relationship of extrinsic motivation with high satisfaction of finding information on destinations and other factors from outside attract tourists to come back to the same destination (Kim, Lee and Kelnosky, 2003). In some behavioral approaches known that motivation also act as antecedent of trust, so that the strong motivation of individuals resulted in increasing tourist trust (Stiglbauer, et al., 2001; Duck, 2009). In contrast to the above findings, Yoon and Uysal, 2005, found a negative effect of extrinsic motivation tourist loyalty. Tourists do not get a lot of travel information and certainty of the destinations. That doesn’t affect the tendency of traveler motivation. Based on above statement of some researchers, it can be hypothesized as follows:H3: The higher the extrinsic motivation of tourists, the higher tourist satisfactionH4: The higher the extrinsic motivation of tourists, the higher the tourist trustH5: The higher the extrinsic motivation of tourists, the higher loyalty to the product. (c) Satisfaction
2900 � I. Wayan Suardana
performance that is perceived by tourists. According to Oliver (1997), satisfaction is an evaluation made by a person between previous expectations and the results obtained from the consumption of a product or service, in this case is the service for at tourist destinations. While Baker and Crompton (2000) concluded satisfaction as an attitude that is shown by the emotional reaction to a product or service. Yi (1991) identified two different concepts, namely the satisfaction of transactional-specific satisfaction and overall satisfaction. Transaction-transactional-specific satisfaction is a concept that refers to the satisfaction of consumer satisfaction ratings after purchasing the product. Overall satisfaction is a concept that measures the satisfaction or dissatisfaction of consumers to a particular product as a whole based on the entire experience in consuming the product. Thus, the overall satisfaction functions of all transaction-specific satisfaction that happened before. The concept used in this study is a thorough satisfaction (overall customer satisfaction). Satisfaction is an attribute that is not the only one that is based on experience. To the possible existence of other antecedent as motivation (Latu and Everett, 2000). By antecedent may indicate the existence of operational consistency motivation and satisfaction. Yoon and Uysal (2005), satisfaction should be perceived from a multidimensional perspective, i.e considering more than one variable observed. Similarly, satisfaction can be used as predictors of loyalty. Travelers are satisfied with the service providers and products purchased, will lead efforts to recommend to others and are willing to go back (Valle et al., 2006).
An Examination of the Relationship among Motivation, Satisfaction... �2901
level of loyalty, even some have an ambiguous attitude, means satisfied but not loyal, or not satisfied but loyal (Olsen, Wilcox and Olsson, 2005).
Based on previous experience, the tourists have been satisfied with a product, it’s necessary to build tourist trust of these products, so that tourists and destinations relationship became closer (Kim, et al., 2011). Relationship marketing theory suggests that the satisfaction of tourists affect trust in the context of internet users (Franco, et al., 2009). Confidence or trust increases if the level of satisfaction felt by tourists increased and continuously updated so that it becomes a commitment to come back (M’Salem, et al., 2011; Jacob, et al., 2010; Moliner, 2007). This is also reinforced by Ha, et al. in 2010 who formulated a trust as a mediator only between gaps and intention to re-visit the same destinations. So a tourist who settles in the interaction with the destination or vice products will affect trust in the destination. This is believed to be one of the investment returns of the relationship. Based on these findings, this research put forward a hypothesis:
H6:The higher tourist satisfaction, the higher the loyalty on productsH7 : The higher tourist satisfaction, the higher the travelers trust
Trust to objects, attributes, and benefits shows the perception of the consumer, so the trust of a consumer is different than other consumers. Trust is a marketing concept that emerged from the relational orientation in marketing activities (Payne (1993: 31). Sideshmukh, et al. (2002) stated that trust is one of elements in relational marketing, which is strongly owned by the company. The use of the term relational marketing written by Berry (1983) states that relational marketing is a philosophy or culture which is very important in an organization. Relationship marketing is an attempt to attract, develop and retain customers (Berry and Parasuraman (1991: 33); Reid and Bojanic, 2010: 59; Peppers and Rogers, 2004). In the tourism perspective, relationship marketing describes various marketing tactics, as an effort to maintain the rating after the sale or visits take place, with the aim of creating a repurchase (tourist retention) (Evans and Laskin, 1994; Cosic and Djuric, 2010).
2902 � I. Wayan Suardana
the context of tourist behavior, trust measurements performance on two aspects: the quality of services that have been offered, and the reliability of services that have been offered (Beugelsdij, 2006).
In this context, the trust serves as a protector of the relationships that have been built by (1) continue to work with partners that already exist, (2) reject the short-term alternative that seems interesting, for the benefit of long-term relationships with existing partners, (3) observe potential action, who are at high risk as the precautionary principle on the belief, that its partners will not behave opportunistically (Morgan and Hunt, 1994). Further Morgan and Hunt (1994) convey social exchange relationships, trust becomes antecedent of loyalty will ensure an ongoing relationship and last forever. Trust will encourage tourists to participate in social exchange. To increase loyalty to the product, a strong trust from tourist is needed (Salegna and Fazel, 2011; Sirdeshmukh, et al., 2002; Lau and Lee, 1999). Other findings also found that the trust has a positive and significant influence to loyalty (Chaudhuri and Holbrook, 2001; Lin and Lu, 2010; Sirdeshmukh, et al., 2002; Aydin et al., 2005). Consistent with the above findings, this study hypothesizes as follows:
H8: The higher the rating the confidence (trust) the higher the loyalty.
(e) Product Loyalty
An Examination of the Relationship among Motivation, Satisfaction... �2903
In tourism business, loyalty to products measured by three different indicators, namely the intention to continue buying the same product, buy more of the same product, and willingness to recommend the product to others (Valle, et al. 2006). In the higher competitive conditions of tourism industry, destination marketers are required to attract new tourists, create and maintain tourist loyalty to the brand of a tourist product. Therefore, measuring and analyzing the determining factor of customer loyalty becomes an important part in tourism marketing. Familiarity with the destination, overall satisfaction, socio demographic profiles, and motivation, becomes determinant factor of tourist willingness to make repeat purchases. General Managers use a variable satisfaction as the standard tourist loyalty. However, satisfaction will not create loyalty to the product, without trust (Lee and Cunningham, 2001). Placing confidences in satisfaction as the only thing that is most important in building loyalty, many are indisputable. Consumer satisfaction only explains a quarter of loyalty behavioral deviation or repeat purchase (Burhan, et al. 2003; and Szymanski and Herand, 2001). Likewise researchers like Mittal and Kamakura (2001); Burham, et al. (2003) suggested understanding the various factors that can build product loyalty, not merely of tourist satisfaction.
Product loyalty can be measured by various indicators, among others (Assael (1992: 65; Jamaludin, et al. 1992), namely: 1) the extent of the products movement or consumer likes to switch to other products, 2) how long those customers have used these products, 3) whether the product has become a lifestyle, 4) whether customers want to recommend the product to others. While Anastassova (2011; Gallarza and Saura, 2006) states that to be an indicator of loyalty products to destinations can be seen from the characteristic includes three aspects: the cognitive, affective, and behavioral aspects. Lee, et al. (2010) explains there are several indicators in the measurement of product loyalty, namely: 1) the number of visits over five years using the same product, 2) the number of positive recommendations given tourists on others to use or select an existing product, 3) an intention or desire still to make a purchase or visit on products previously purchased, 4) have an emotional attachment that is strong because it has a positive experience on products purchased, 5) have a tolerance for a price adjustment. Based on the above discussion, it can be prepared the conceptual framework of the study. The main variable in this study are intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, and satisfaction, trust, and loyalty products. The relationship of these variables can be seen in picture 2.1:
3. ANALYSIS RESULT
3.1. Methods of Data Collection and Analysis Method
2904 � I. Wayan Suardana
Nusa Penida and Candidasa. Selection of study sample of 300 people conducted by using a non-probability sampling method. From 300 respondents who were involved in this research, only 250 were considered and included in the analysis, while the remaining 50 were not included, because the responses were incomplete. Whole respondents are foreign tourists who do diving in Bali more than one visit. Research data collection is done by using a questionnaire. The questionnaire contains a number of statements that were developed from the grating instrument. The questionnaire was chosen to collect data because respondents are people who know themselves, the statement by the subjects to researchers is true and trustworthy and interpretation of the subject of the question/statement filed to the subject is the same as what is meant by the researcher.
Preparation of a questionnaire based on the indicators refers to the theory. The indicators used in this study is an indicator reflective. In the reflective models, groups of manifest variables associated with latent variables assumed to measure indicators that manifests construct. Seen as an indicator of the effects of latent variables that can be observed empirically. The hallmark of the variables measured in the reflective scale is togetherness between the measuring indicators (common factor) (Hair, et al., 2010). Prior to the data collection was done, the questionnaire was tested for validity and reliability with 50 respondents who were not included in the data analysis. By using the minimal requirements corrected item-total correlation of 0.30 for validity and Cronbach’s alpha of 0.60 for reliability. The test results showed all items of questions shows valid and reliable in measuring variable research.
This research uses a quantitative approach to implement the data analysis, the analytical methods used in analyzing empirical data gathered researchers include (1) analysis of descriptive statistics intended to determine the frequency distribution
An Examination of the Relationship among Motivation, Satisfaction... �2905
of the answers from the questionnaire, (2) statistical analysis of inferential used to test the research hypothesis is Structural Equation Modeling (SEM), (3) used Sobel test to test the indirect effect. Before testing the hypotheses, researchers have tested the validity and reliability of data used in the data analysis. Referring to Hair, et al., (2010: 627), an indicator is said to be valid if t e”1,96 and reliable if the construct reliability � 0.50. Based on these requirements, all the indicators or question items declared valid and reliable in measuring the variables.
3.2. The Result of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) Analysis
The variables in this research include intrinsic motivation variable (X1), extrinsic motivation (X2), satisfaction (X3), and loyalty products (Y1).
3.2.1. Measurement Model
The following table presents the average yield and loading factor of each indicator in each research variable.
Based on Table 4.1, noted that all indicators measured the variables significantly. The analysis also showed that the most powerful indicator as a measure of intrinsic motivation (X1) is the relationship/social cohesion (X1.3). If it is associated with the result of the descriptive analysis, it shows that this indicator is in the category of higher/better category (average 3,772 range in the category of 3,41 to 4,20), although it is not the highest indicator that perceived by the respondents. This shows that tourists will obtain a high intrinsic motivation, primarily due to the high correlation/social cohesion which is owned by the travelers. Extrinsic motivation (X2) variable shows that the most powerful indicator as measurement is, following friend’s activities (X2.4). If it is associated with the result of the descriptive analysis, it shows that this indicator is also highest indicator that perceived by respondents and this indicator is in the higher/better category (average 3,900 range in the category of 3,41 to 4,20). This shows that travelers will get extrinsic high motivation, primarily due to high desire to follow the activities of friends, thus supporting high extrinsic motivation for travelers to do diving in Bali. Next, the results of confirmatory factor analysis in Table 4.1 shows that strongest indicators as a measure of satisfaction (X3) is that diving activity helps relieve stress (X3.4). If it is associated with the result of descriptive analysis, it shows that this indicator is in the higher/better category (average 3,956 range in the category of 3,41 to 4,20), although it is not the highest indicator that perceived by the respondents. This shows that tourists will receive high satisfaction, mainly due to the perception that the high diving activity helps relieve stress. In fact, the activity related to nature, such as diving, is very helpful to relieve stress, thus supporting tourist’s high satisfaction to do diving in Bali.
2906 � I. Wayan Suardana
The Result of Loading Factor
Variable Indicator Mean Loading Sig
Intrinsic motivation (X1) X1.1 For knowledge 4.108 0.565 0.000 X1.2 To improve the competence 4.052 0.671 0.000 of diving
X1.3 To establish a relation or social 3.772 0.679 0.000 cohesion
X1.4 For sensation or relaxation 3.528 0.548 Fix Extrinsic Motivation (X2) X2.1To improve diving achievement 3.832 0.613 0.000
X2.2 Diving di Bali gets adequate facilities 3.740 0.470 0.000 X2.3 Bali has underwater diversity 3.892 0.632 0.000 X2.4 Following an invitation of a friend 3.900 0.681 Fix Satisfaction (X3) X3.1 Diving is a main choice in travelling 4.024 0.508 0.000
X3.2 Experience gained is precisely the 4.064 0.485 0.000 same as expected
X3.3 On the whole diving environment 3.868 0.507 0.000 in Bali is as expected
X3.4 On the whole the service given is 3.956 0.626 0.000 as expected,
X3.5 On the whole th need for diving 4.016 0.413 0.000 is fulfilled
X3.5 Overall it is interesting to do
diving in Bali 4.020 0.500 Fix
Trust (X4) X4.1 believe that my provider would 3.908 0.564 0.000 act in my best interest
X4.2 I would characterize my current 4.000 0.568 0.000 provider as honest
X4.3 In general, my provider is very 3.968 0.659 0.000 knowledgeable about diving and its
X4.4 I general, destination safety 4.028 0.630 Fix for diving
Product loyalty (Y1) Y1.1 Do not want to switch from 3.500 0.496 Fix diving in Bali.
Y1.2 Always choose diving when 3.832 0.734 0.000 travelling in Bali.
Y1.3 Diving becomes life style 3.968 0.594 0.000 Y1.4 Would recommend diving 4.140 0.519 0.000 to others
An Examination of the Relationship among Motivation, Satisfaction... �2907
value of loading factor compared to four other indicators. If it is associated with the result of descriptive analysis, it shows that this indicator is in the higher/ better category (average 3,832 range in the category of 3,41 to 4,20), although it is not the highest indicator that perceived by the respondents. This shows that travelers are considered to have high trust, primarily seen from the competence and diving operators knowledge in Bali.
On product loyalty variable (Y1), it shows that the second indicator who always choose diving (Y1.2) has the highest value of loading factor compared to four other indicators. If it is associated with the result of descriptive analysis, it shows that this indicator is in the higher/better category (average 3,832 range in the category of 3,41 to 4,20), although it is not the highest indicator that perceived by the respondents. This shows that travelers are considered high loyalty, primarily seen from the attitude that always choose diving in the tour.
3.2.2. Structural equation model (SEM) Assumption Testing
Assuming that must be fulfilled prior to SEM analysis, is the assumption of normality, absence of outliers, and linearity. The multivariate normality assumption was tested with the help of software AMOS 6. In univariate normal distribution of data has been dominant since the absolute value of CR compared with the distribution of the critical value Z at ± = 5% ± 2.58 shows the value smaller than the value of Z. In univariate test, there are two indicators which is not normal distributed, those are data X3.2 with X.4.3, with each value of 4.116 and 4.601. However, based on arguments of central limit, if the sample is greater then the statistics will be normally distributed. With a sample size of n = 250, then the data of this research is agreed meet the arguments of central limit, so the assumption of normality of the data is not critical and can be ignored.
To test the presence or absence of outliers, can be seen with Mahalanobis Distance (Md). Mahalanobis distance is evaluated using a value of 128.565. From Mahalanobis distance to the most far distant observation point is the 175th respondent with a value Md = 87.069. Compared to the value 150.7, the value of 175th Md point is <128 565, so it can be concluded that all points of observation is not an outlier. Linearity assumption testing is done with Curve Fit method. Linearity test results shows all models were significant linear because the Sig value is > 0.05, thus concluded that the assumption of linearity has been fulfilled.
3.2.3. Goodness-of-fit measures for the structural equation model
2908 � I. Wayan Suardana
Goodness of Fit Testing Results Overall Model
Criteria Cut-of value Result Remarks
Chi Square Small 347,938 Good Model
p-value � 0,05 0,060 Good Model
CMIN/DF � 2,00 1,869 Good Model
GFI � 0,90 0,912 Good Model
AGFI � 0,90 0,882 Marginal
TLI � 0,95 0,950 Good Model
CFI � 0,95 0,960 Good Model
RMSEA � 0,05 0,059 Good Model
Goodness of Fit Overall test result based on picture and table 4.2 shows that 7 of the 8 criteria indicate a good model except AGFI marginal. According to (Hair,et al, 2010), the best criteria that is used as a good indication of the model, is the value of Chi Square / DF is less than 2, and RMSEA was under 0,08. In this research, the value of CMIN/DF and RMSEA has fulfilled the cut-off value. Chi square results show Ç2 = 347.938, with a probability value of 0.060 which is above the limit of 0.05. It means that there is no difference between the sample covariance matrix and population covariance matrix, therefore the model is acceptable. An index measuring the suitability of the model GFI, AGFI, TLI, CFI, RMSEA, and CMIN / DF are in the expected range of values (Hair, et al 2010). Therefore, the SEM models in this research is suitable and feasible to be used, to allow interpretation for further discussion. It also shows that this model could be replicated in similar samples of the same population.
3.2.4. Analysis of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)
An Examination of the Relationship among Motivation, Satisfaction... �2909
Structural Model SEM Results: Direct Impact
Relationship between variables Std coefficient P-value Remarks
H1: Intrinsic Motivation (X1) � Satisfaction (X3) 0.341 0.001 Significant H2: Intrinsic Motivation (X1) � Product Loyalty (Y) 0.187 0.022 Significant H3: Extrinsic motivation (X2) � Satisfaction (X3) 0.232 0.001 Significant H4: Extrinsic motivation (X2) �Trust (X4) 0.028 0.679 Non Significant H5: Extrinsic Motivation (X2) � Product loyalty (Y1) 0.357 0.001 Significant H6: Satisfaction (X3) � Trust(X4) 0.471 0.001 Significant H7: Satisfaction (X3) � Product Loyalty (Y1) 0.093 0.169 Non Significant H8: Trust (X4) � Product Loyalty (Y1) 0.304 0.007 Significant
Graphically presented as follows (the dashed lines denote that the relationship is not significant):
Figure 4.1: The Structural Model of SEM Result
The calculation results in Table 4.3 and Fig. 4.1, shows that from eight hypotheses constructed in this research, only two were not significant, those are the relationship between satisfaction and loyalty, and extrinsic motivation with trust. This indicates that there is a mediating role in the satisfaction and trust, in the relationship between motivation and loyalty. This shows the significance of direct effect between extrinsic motivation and trust, as well as satisfaction and product loyalty.
2910 � I. Wayan Suardana
also has a tendency to get high satisfaction. Satisfaction was obtained because of the encouragement from the inside and the outside environment of the individual, to realize the motivation. These finding proves the implementation of the self-determination theory, where satisfaction or pleasure is created from the sincerity with a strong push from within ourselves. It is also consistent with the opinion of Ryan and Deci (1985) that intrinsic motivation is the internalization of a process in obtaining satisfaction. These findings are also consistent and corroborate the findings Yoon and Uysal (2005); Lee (2009); Esichikul, (2012); Schuler, et al. (2010); Gnoth (1997); Vallerand (2010); Correaia, et al. (2009); Crompton, (1979).
This research also shows that trust is influenced by traveler satisfaction, while extrinsic motivation is not able to prove the existence of such influence. Coefficient value is 0,471 with 5% significance. This proves that the only satisfaction of antecedent is from trust, so that the hypothesis H6 is proven, while the H4 is not proven. These findings support the theory of marketing relationship (Berry, 1995), that customer satisfaction is very important but not sufficient to achieve marketing goals. To create travelers trust, necessarily needed positive experience of the travelers. Besides the above facts, it also shows that external influences, namely destination, was not affecting the tourists trust. Diving becomes specific activities, so that experience is the main consideration in deciding to purchase a product, rather than advertising information or facilities in destinations. Satisfaction with the tourist destinations and facilities which are perceived by return travelers are more satisfying than the first visitors. This finding indicates that the respondents feel the trust when they find satisfaction in the tour. These findings support previous research, which states that satisfaction (Yen, et al., 2004; Sanchez-Franco, 2009; Rexha, et al., 2003; Walters, et al., 1999; Kim et al., 2011 and Chiung and Wen 2007) has positive effect on traveler’s trust.
An Examination of the Relationship among Motivation, Satisfaction... �2911
travel back. In addition to the direct effect test, the SEM is also known indirect effect. The indirect effect is the result of multiplying two (2) direct effects. Testing approach of the indirect affect is using Sobel Test tools, for the two no significant direct effect above, those are the effect of extrinsic motivation on trust, as well as the influence of satisfaction on product loyalty. Here are presented the results of the indirect effect:
Table 4.4 Indirect Effect
Relationship between variables Std P-value Remarks coefficient
Mediation 1. Extrinsic Motivation (X2) � 0.232x0.471 0.009 Significant Satisfaction (X3) � Trust (X4) = 0.109 Full mediation Mediation 2. Satisfaction (X3) � Trust (X4) � 0.471x0.304 0.002 Significant
Product loyalty (Y1) = 0.143 Full mediation
The test results as follows: The indirect effect between extrinsic motivation (X2) on trust (X4) via satisfaction (X3), obtained p value of 0.009 (> 0.05) and the coefficient of the indirect influence of 0,109. So the conclusion is, there is a significant indirect effect between extrinsic motivation (X2 ) on trust (X4) via satisfaction (X3). It means, that the higher value of extrinsic motivation (X2), will affect the value of trust (X4) through satisfaction (X3). This illustrates that the tourists motivation does not only incr ease the loyalty of the product but also increase tourist satisfaction. Furthermore, this research shows that satisfaction becomes full mediators on motivational influence with trust. These findings corroborate the findings of Ryan and Deci, (1985) and Mundet and Ribera, (2001).
The indirect effect between satisfaction (X3) on products loyalty (Y1) through the trust (X4), obtained p value of 0.002 (> 0.05) and the coefficient of the indirect influence of 0.143. So it can be concluded that there is a significant indirect effect between satisfaction (X3) on products loyalty (Y1) through the trust (X4). It means that, the higher value of satisfaction (X3), will affect the value of products loyalty (Y1) through trust (X4). In other words, that the satisfaction not only increase loyalty but also increase the tourist trust. This formulation also showed that trust acts as a mediator on the effect of satisfaction with the product loyalty. So trust as a fundamental element for the success of a relationship marketing (Berry, 1995). This finding is consistent with Morgan and Hunt, 1994; Kim, et al 2011; Caceres and Paparoidamis, 2007).
4. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATION
2912 � I. Wayan Suardana
past experience. In other words, the existence of a strong motivation can make consumers remain loyal to the products they used, even though at that time they feel dissatisfaction or distrust of the product. The findings also show the role of satisfaction and trust as an intermediary variable or full mediator on the relationship between motivation and loyalty, because extrinsic motivation indirectly affect trust. Meanwhile, satisfaction also indirectly affects the loyalty to the product. This shows that the satisfaction and trust are needed in increasing the tourist motivation to grow the tourist loyalty to the product. Empirically, this model proves tourists encouragement directly or indirectly increase product loyalty, if tourists get the satisfaction and trust from the past experience. The loyalty shown by the intention to re-use the same product while travelling, recommending the same product to others, and have a tendency to be directly involved in the same activities in the future.
The result of this research provides a theoretical and practical implication. These findings are consistent and reinforce the results of previous researches, particularly those which are conducted by Yoon and Uysal (2005); Kim, Lee, and Klenosky, 2003; Careres and Paparoidamis, 2007; Sirdeshmukh, et al 2002: Kim, et al, 2011). Theoretically, the consistency of these findings suggests the establishment (robustness) from the influence of motivation, satisfaction and trust in improving tourist loyalty. Besides, these findings also strengthen and deepen the implementation of the theory of decision-making on the behavior of tourists (Swarbrooke abd Horner, 2007), relationship marketing (Berry, 1995) and self-determination theory (Ryan and Deci, 1985).
An Examination of the Relationship among Motivation, Satisfaction... �2913
synergy to create a quality experience travel to all service aspects, that allows for travelling back and recommending others.
5. CONCLUDING COMMENTS
From the above results, some conclusions were obtained as follows: (1) intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation influence on satisfaction, (2) extrinsic motivation and satisfaction affect the trust, (3) the intrinsic motivation; extrinsic motivation, satisfaction, and trust affect the product loyalty. Tourist satisfaction tested into a full mediation on relationship between extrinsic motivation and trust. Besides, trust is also a full mediator in the relationship between satisfaction and product loyalty. Satisfaction and trust become variables into the relationship between motivation and product loyalty. It means, to build product loyalty, not just satisfaction and trust are concerned, but tourist motivation has to be noted as well. This research has several weaknesses that need to be overcome for researchers who are interested to make research about product loyalty, especially in the subject of research. This research was conducted on the diving activities as a representation of the tourism market. To obtain findings that can be generalized in the tourism market, researchers need to use other tourist activities to test the consistency of findings across the market.
The authors gratefully acknowledge the helpful comments of Prof. Dr. IKG. Bendesa, M.A.D.E, and the anonymous reviewers for providing constructive comments.The authors also thanking Prof Dr. Made Antara, MS for his editorial assistance.
Anastassova, L. (2011), Tourist Loyalty and Destination Brand Image Perception: the Case of Sunny Beach Resort, Bulgaria. European Journal of Tourism Research.4 (2). ISSN: 1994-7658. pp 191-204.
Assael, Henry. (1992), Consumer Behavior and Marketing Action. Fourth Edition. Publishing Company.
Baker, Dwayne A. and Crompton, John L. (2000), Quality, Satisfaction And Behavioral Intentions. Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 27, No. 3. pp. 785-804, Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Beggs, B. A., and Elkins, D. J. (2012), The Influence of Leisure Motivation on Leisure Satisfaction. LARNet; The Cyber Journal of Applied Leisure and Recreation Research. Volume 15, Issue 3, Fall 2012, Pp 1-12.
Benito, Oscar G., and Partal, Mercedes. M. (2012) Role of Retailer Positioning and Product Category on the Relationship Between Store Brand Consumption and Store Loyalty. Journal of Retailing 88. No. 2. Elsevier.
2914 � I. Wayan Suardana
Berry, LL. (1983a), Relationship Marketing: Emerging Perspective on Service Marketing. In L.L. Berry and G.I. Shostack dan G. Upah (eds), Chicago: American Marketing Association. Berry, LL. (1995 b), Relationship Marketing of Services-Growing Interest, Emerging Perspectives.
Journal of The Academy of Marketing Science. Vol. 23. No.4. pp. 236-245.
Beugelsdijk, Sjoerd. (2006), A Note on the Theory and Measurement of Trust in Explaining Differences in Economic Growth. Cambridge Journal of Economics. Vol. 30. Pp. 371–387. Bowen, John T. and Chen, Shiang-Lih. (2001), The relationship between customer loyalty and
customer satisfaction. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 13 (5).pp 213-217.
Caceres, R.C. and Paparoidamis, N. G. (2007), Service quality, relationship satisfaction, trust, commitment and business-to business loyalty. European Journal of Marketing. Vol 41. No. 7/ 8, 2007. Pp 836-867. Emerald group Publishing Limited.
Chauduri, a. and Holbrook, M.B. (2001), The Chain of Effects from Brand Trust and Brand Effect to Brand Performance. The Role of Brand Loyalty, Marketing Science. Vol 17. No 1. pp 45-65. Cheng, C.F. and Lee, A. H. (2011), The influence of Relationship Marketing Strategy and
Transaction Cost on Customer Satisfaction, Perceived Risk, and Customer Loyalty. African Journal of Business Management, Vol. 5 (13), pp 5199-5209. ISSN 1993-8233.
Chow, S. and Holden, R. (1997), Toward an Understanding of Loyalty: the Moderating role of Trust. Journal of Managerial Issues. Fall 1997; 9, 3. ABI/INFORM Research. Pp 275-298. Correia, Antonia, and Moital, Miguel. (2009), Antecedents and Consequences of Prestige
Motivation in Tourism An Expectancy-Value Motivation. In Kozak, M., and Decrop, A., (ed). Handbook of Tourism Behavior Theory & Practice. New York: Routledge Taylor & Frrancis Group. Cosic, M. and Djuric, M. D. (2010), Relationship Marketing in The Tourist Services Sector. UTMS
Journal of Economics, Vol. 1 No 1. pp. 53-60.
Crompton, J. L. (1979), Motivations for Pleasure Vacations. Annals of Tourism Research. Vol 6. pp 408-424.
Deci, E. L.& Ryan, R. M. (1985), The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self determination of Behavior.Psychological Inquiry, 11. Pp 227-268.
Deng, Z. Yaobin Lu, Kwok Kee Wei, and Jinlong Zhang. (2010), Understanding Customer Satisfaction and Loyalty: An Empirical Study of Mobile Instant Messages in China. International Journal of Information Management 30. pp 289-300. Elsevier.
Dick, A. S., and K. Basu (1994), Customer Loyalty: Toward an Integrated Framework. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 22 (2), pp. 99-113.
Esichikul, Ranee. (2012), Travel Motivations, Behavior and Requirements of European Senior Tourists to Thailand. PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. Vol. 10, No. 2, Special Issue. pp 47-58.
Evan, Joel R. and Laskin, Richard L., (1994), The Relationship Marketing Process: A Conceptualization and Application. Industrial Marketing Management 23, pp 439-452. New York: Avenue of the Americans.
An Examination of the Relationship among Motivation, Satisfaction... �2915
Franco, Manuael J Sanchez. (2009), The Moderating Effects of Involvement on the Relationship Between Satisfaction, Trust and Commitment in e-Banking. Journal Interactive Marketing. Vol 23. Pp 247-258.
Fullerton, G., (2005), The Role of Commitment in Service Relationship. Kingston, Ontario : School of Business Acadia University, limited publication, p. 3-18.
Gagne, Maryle‘ne and Deci, Edward L. (2005), Self-Determination Theory and Work Motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior. Vol. 26, pp 331–362. Published online in Wiley InterScience. Gallarza M.G and Saura, I G. (2006), Value dimensions, perceived value, satisfaction and loyalty: an investigation of university students travel behavior. Tourism Management 27 (2006) pp 437-452. Elsevier.
Garbarino, E., and Johnson, M. (1999), The Different Roles of Satisfaction, Trust, And Commitment in Customer Relationship. Journal of Marketing, Vol 63. No. 2. pp 70-87. Gnoth, J. Bigne J.E, and Andreu, L. (2006), ”Waiting Time Effects on the Leisure Experince and
Visitor Emotions”. In Kozak, M and Luisa Andreu. Progress in Tourism Marketing. UK: Advances in Tourism Research Series.
Gray, Jerry I., Frederick A. Starke. (1984), Organizational Behavior, Concepts and Applications. Columbus: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company.
Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., & Anderson, R.E. (2010), Multivariate Data Analysis. Seventh Edition. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
Holden, A., and Sparrowhawk, J. (2002), Understanding the Motivations of Ecotourist: the Case of Trekkers in Annapurna, Nepal. International Journal of Tourism Research. Vol 4. pp 435-446. Publish in Wiley InterScience.
Hui, T K., David Wan and Alvin Ho. (2007), Tourist satisfaction, recommendation and revisiting Singapore. Tourism Management 28. Pp 965-975.
Jamaludin, M., Johari, S. Aziz, A., Kayat, K., Yusof, A.R.M., (2012), Examining Structural Relationship between Destination Image, Tourist Satisfaction and Destination Loyalty. International Journal of Independent Research and Studies – IJIRS ISSN: 2226-4817; EISSN: 2304-6953. Vol. 1, No.3. pp. 89-96
Jang, S. and Feng, R. (2007), Temporal destination revisit intention: The effects of novelty seeking and satisfaction. Tourism Management. 28. pp 580-590.
Javalgi, R.R.G., & Moberg, C. (1997), Service Loyalty: Implications for Service Providers. The Journal of Service Marketing, Vol. 11 (3), pp 165-179.
Joynathsing, C., dan Ramkissoon, H., (2010), “Understanding the Behavioral Intention of European Tourists”. International Research Symposium in Service Management. ISSN 1694-0938. Mairitius, 24-27 August 2010.
Keating, B., & Kriz, A. (2008), Outbound Tourism from China: Literature Review and Research Agenda. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 15. pp. 32–41.
Kim, J. Soongeun Hong, Jinyoung Min and Heeseok Lee. (2011), Antecedents of application service continuance: A synthesis of satisfaction and trust. Expert Systems With Applications 38 (2011) pp 9530-9542. Elsevier.
2916 � I. Wayan Suardana
Kouthouris, Charilaos. (2009), An Examination of the Relationships between Motivation, Involvement and Intention to continuing Participation among Recreational Skiers. I
nternational Journal of S port Management Recreation & Tourism. Vol. 4. pp. 1-19.
Latu, Tavite M. and Everett, Andre M. (2000), Review of Satisfaction Research And Measurement Approaches. Science and Research Internal Report 183. New Zealand: Department of Conservation.
Lau, G., and Lee, S. (1999), Consumers’ Trust in a Brand and Link to Brand Loyalty. Journal of Market Focused Management. Vol 4. pp. 341-370.
Lee, M., and Cunningham, L.F. (2001), A Cost/Benefit Approach to Understanding Service Loyalty. Journal of Services Marketing. Vol 15. No 2. pp 113-130.
Lee, M-S. Huey-Der Hsiao, and Ming Fen Yang. (2010), The Study of the Relationships among Experiential Marketing, Service Quality, Customer Satisfaction and Customer Loyalty. The International Journal of Organizational Innovation. pp. 352-378.
Lee, T. H. (2009), A Structural Model to Examine How Destination Image, Attitude, and Motivation Affect the Future Behavior of Tourists. Leisure Sciences: An Interdisciplinary Journal. 31: 215–236, Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
Li, Xiang (Robert), Petrick, James F. (2010), Revisiting the Commitment-Loyalty Distinction in Cruising Context. Journal of Leisure Research. First Quarter 2010; Vol 42, 1. proquest. pp. 67-90.
Lin, Long-Yi and Ching-Yuh Lu. (2010), The Influence of Corporate Image, Relationship Marketing, and Trust on Purchase Intention: The Moderating Effects of Word-Of-Mouth. Tourism Review. Vol. 65 No. 3. pp. 16-34. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Lindenberg, S. (2001), Intrinsic Motivation in a New Light. Kyklos, 54 (2/3).
M’Sallem, W. Bouhlel, and Mohamed Nabil Mzoughi. (2011), The Perceived Ethical Behavior of Bankers: A North African Persfective. Australian Journal of Business and Management Research, Vol. 1. No 2. pp 45-54.
Mayer, R. C., & Gavin, M. B. (2005), Trust in Management and Performance: Who Minds The Shop While the Employees Watch The Boss? Academy of Management Journal, 48, 874–888. Mittal, V., WA. Kamakura (2001), Satisfaction, repurchase Intent, and Repuchase Behavior: Investigating the Moderating Effect of Customer Characteristics. Journal of Marketing Reserach 38 (1). pp 131-142.
Moliner, M.A., Javier Sa´nchez, Rosa M. Rodriguez and Luý´s Callarisa. (2007), Perceived Relationship Quality and Post-Purchase Perceived Value an Integrative Framework. European Journal of Marketing. Vol. 41 No. 11/12. pp. 1392-1422. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Moorman, Christine, Gerald Zaltman and Rohit Deshpande. (1993), Relationship Between Providers and User of Marketing Research: The Dynamics of Trust Within and Between Organization. Journal of Marketing Research. 29 (August). pp. 314-329.
Morgan R.M. and Hunt S. D. (1994), The Commitment-Trust Theory of Relationship Marketing. Journal of Marketing. Vol 58 (1994) pp. 20-38.
An Examination of the Relationship among Motivation, Satisfaction... �2917
Research. Vol. 6. pp 439-447. Wiley Interscience.
O’Malley, L. and Tynan, C. (2000), Relationship marketing in consumer markets Rhetoric or reality? European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 34 No. 7. pp 797-815. MCB University Press.
Oliver, R.L. (1997), Satisfaction. A Behavioral Perspective on the Consumer. McGraw-Hill, New
Park, Duk-Byeong and, Yoon, Yoo-Shik. (2009), Segmentation by Motivation in Rural Tourism:
A Korean case study. Tourism Management 30. pp. 99–108. Journal homepage:
Payne. (1993), The Essence of Services Marketing. Englewood Cliffs NJ
Peppers, D & M Rogers. (2004), Managing Customer Relationship: A Strategic Framework. New
Jersey: John Wiley and Sons.
Reid, R.D. and Bojanic, D.C. (2010), Hospitality Marketing Management. Fifth Editions. United
States of America: Wiley & Sons.
Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L. (2000), Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and
New Directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology 25. pp 54-67.
Salegna, Gary J., and Goodwin, Stephen A. (2005), Consumer Loyalty To Service Providers: An Integrated Conceptual Model. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfactions and Complaining Behavior. Vol 24. ABI/INFORM Research. pp 42-54.
Sirdeshmukh, D., Singh, J., and Sabol, B. (2002), Consumer Trust, Value, and Loyalty in Relational Exchanges. Journal of Marketing, Vol 66, 1; proquest, pp 55-37.
Stiglbauer, B., Gnambs, T., Gamsjager, M. (2001), The Interactive Effects of Motivations and Trust in Anonymity on Adolescents’ Enduring Participation in Web-Based Social Science Research: a Longitudinal Behavioral Analysis. International Journal of Internet Science. Vol 6 (1), pp 29-43. IJIS .NET
Swarbrooke John. and Susan Horner. (2007), Consumer Behaviour in Tourism. Second edition.
London. Butterworth & Heinemann.
Szymanski, DM, and DH. Herard. (2001), Customer Satisfaction: A Meta-Analysis of the Emperical Evidence. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. 29 (1). pp 16-35.
Taleghani, M. Choobeh, and Mousavian, S.J. (2011), The Role of Loyalty Dimensions in Customer
Orientation Process For New Enterprises in Tourism Industries of Iran. AustralianJournal
of Business and Management Research, Vol 1. No.6. pp 143-151.
Um, S. Kaye Chon. Younghee Ro. (2006), Antecedens of Revisi Intention. Annals of Tourism
Research. Vol. 33. No.4 pp 1141-1158.
Valle, Patricia Oom do., João Albino Silva, Júlio Mendes, Manuela Guerreiro. (2006), Tourist Satisfaction and Destination Loyalty intention: A Structural and Categorical Analysis.
International Journal of Business Science and Applied Management, Volume 1, Issue 1. Pp. 25-44. Business-and-Management.com
Vallerand, Robert. J. (2004), Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation in Sport. Encylopedia of Applied Psychology. Vol. 2. Elsevier.s
2918 � I. Wayan Suardana
Yen, T., Liu, H., and Tuan, C. (2004), Managing Relationship Efforts to Influence Loyalty: An Empirical Study on the Sun Link Sea Forest and Recreation Park Taiwan. International Journal of Organization Innovation. Vol 2. No 2. pp 179-194.
Yi, Y. (1991), A Critical Review of Consumer Satisfaction. In Zeithaml, V.A (ed). Review of Marketing. 1990. American Marketing Association. Chicago. IL. pp 68-12.
Yoon, Y. and Uysal. M. (2005), An examination of the Effects of Motivation and Satisfaction on
Destination Loyalty: a Structural Model. Tourism Management. 26 (2005) 45–56.
Yuksel, A. Yuksel, F., and Bilim, Y. (2010), Destination attachment: Effects on customer satisfaction and cognitive, affective and co-native loyalty. Tourism Management 31. pp 274-284. www.elsevier.com/locate/tourma.
Yuksel, A., and Yuksel, F. (2007), Shopping Risk Perceptions: Effects on Tourists’ Emotions,
Satisfaction and Expressed Loyalty Intentions. Tourism Management 28 (2007) pp. 703–713.