Keywords

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

1 Introduction

Information sources are a key factor in the tourist’s decision-making process (Dey and Sarma 2010), and these sources not only give tourists elements that help them decide which destination is the most appropriate according to their motivations, but they also create images in the mind of individuals (Alvarez and Campo 2011; Hanlan and Kelly 2005; Llodrà-Riera et al. 2015). Since the 1980s several studies have focused on determining the effectiveness of information sources (Fodness and Murray 1997; Gitelson and Crompton 1983). Nowadays, however, the Internet has revolutionised the search for information (Buhalis and Law 2008b), making it a significant factor in purchase decision-making (Frías et al. 2012; McCartney et al. 2008).

At the same time, research has demonstrated the relevance of tourist image as a factor in understanding tourist behaviour (Echtner and Ritchie 1993). In this context, information sources have been postulated as one of the most influential factors in tourist image formation during the decision-making process (Dey and Sarma 2010). Therefore, the tourist image is also an influencing factor in a destination’s competitiveness, taking into account its strategic character in creating, maintaining or increasing tourism demand. For this reason, Govers and Go (2004) mention the need “to formulate a plan for projecting the ‘right’ image” as an essential part of a tourism development strategy. According to Gartner (1994), this strategy needs to be planned through the appropriate “image mix”. Therefore, it is important to consider the complexity of the tourism system in a destination (Gunn 1972; Laws 1995; Pearce 1989), where multiple agents intervene in the process of marketing the destination. Gartner (1994) identified eight types of agents that participate in the image formation process, each representing one or more information sources. These information sources only show the attributes each of the agents wishes to highlight, therefore this can result in a fragmented image (Camprubí et al. 2014).

Consequently, tourism image is transmitted to both actual and potential tourists through these various online and offline sources of information; and are postulated as a factor that can increase knowledge of a destination. So, depending on the amount, and type, of information sources used, tourists can perceive images in substantially different ways. When dissonances arise, some authors point out their possible effects on the tourist image (Camprubí et al. 2014; Govers and Go 2004) and particularly, on cognitive evaluations.

Considering this background, previous research has given an insight into the relevance of various types of information sources and their effect on tourist behaviour (Fodness and Murray 1997) and image perception (Li et al. 2009). Academic literature identifies gaps in contributions to the analysis of image perception (Govers and Go 2004); and the image fragmentation of urban destinations in tourism brochures (Camprubí et al. 2014) and websites (Camprubí 2015). The possible effect of image fragmentation on perceived tourist image is pointed out in these studies. However, there are no studies analysing the relationship between the perceived tourist image of a destination, and information sources used, in order to find out incongruences among the various sources. When significant incongruences are detected, this is an indication that projected tourist image in the various information sources are different. This indicates, therefore, that tourist destination image is fragmented. Accordingly, this study aims to determine to what extent the number and type of information sources consulted influence the perceived image and cognitive evaluations made by tourists of a given destination, and to detect incongruences in the emitted image of the destination studied.

2 Literature Review

A tourist image is conceived as a mental construction, where the visual component comes second after tourists’ previous knowledge, impressions and beliefs of the destination (Echtner and Ritchie 1993; Kotler et al. 1993). However, “the tourist image is, at the same time, a subjective construction (that varies from person to person), and a social construction, based on the idea of collective imagination” (Galí and Donaire 2005, p. 778). Therefore, any individual has images of tourism destinations in their mind, whether they have visited them or not (Baloglu and McCleary 1999; Beerli and Martín 2004; Gunn 1988).

Academic literature agrees that tourism image can be differentiated between emitted and perceived images (Bramwell and Rawding 1996; Galí and Donaire 2005). The first are images that “reach the consumer by an image transmission or diffusion process through various channels of communication”; however perceived images “are formed from the interaction between these projected messages and the consumer’s own needs, motivations, prior knowledge, experience, preferences, and other personal characteristics” (Bramwell and Rawding 1996).

The influential factors of these images are varied, and several studies have tried to explain the image formation process from the demand-side (Baloglu and McCleary 1999; Beerli and Martín 2004), from the supply-side (Camprubí et al. 2009) and from both a supply and demand perspective (Tasci and Gartner 2007).

In particular, Baloglu and McClearly (1999) identified three main issues affecting the perceived image formation process: tourism motivations, socio-demographics, and various information sources. Numerous studies (Josiassen et al. 2015; Tasci et al. 2007) have highlighted all three factors as highly relevant for image perception, and more specifically for cognitive and affective evaluations. From among these factors, this study focuses on information sources and their relationship with perceived image.

2.1 Information Sources and Tourism Image Fragmentation

According to Li et al. (2009), information sources are the basis for tourism destination image. The information search process implies activating stored knowledge in the individual’s mind, or acquiring new external knowledge. This process is essential to increasing knowledge about a destination for three main reasons (Gitelson and Crompton 1983): (a) vacations are considered as high-involvement purchases; (b) tourism products are intangible; and (c) there is a lack of knowledge about the destination. Thus, information sources represent an anticipation of how the destination can be consumed.

Gartner (1994), in his seminal contribution, identifies a continuum of agents contributing to image formation of a destination. Each of these agents represents one or more tourist information sources influencing visitors’ perception of the destination. Tasci and Gartner (2007) observe the controllable and uncontrollable nature of these information sources in tourist image projections, and how tourists perceive an image. In this regard, Camprubí et al. (2014) mention that tourism images with substantial differences can be projected at the same time, having possible consequences on tourist satisfaction if this phenomenon is not well managed. Even though integrated marketing communication involves speaking with one voice, this does not mean that all the communication tools have to provide exactly the same information. Information can differ from one sourincluded 18 different typesce to another, if this information is directed to the right market segments. Subsequently, tourism image fragmentation is not a problem when segmented information is offered to each target and its particular interests.

Obviously, not all tourists have the same previous knowledge of a place, nor do they use the same information sources. It is for this reason that the level of knowledge from one individual to another can vary, taking as a reference both the number and type of information sources used (Gitelson and Crompton 1983; Schul and Crompton 1983) and previous experience of a destination (Letho et al. 2006). Various types of information sources have been detected in academic literature. For example, Bieger and Laesser (2004) included 18 different types of information sources in their study; Money and Crotts (2003) identified four categories (personal, marketer-dominated, neutral and experiential sources). More recent studies differentiate between online and offline information searches (Li et al. 2009; Llodrà-Riera et al. 2015; Luo et al. 2004).

Finding of previous research in this area show that both the amount and type of information sources used have a direct influence on the perceived image of a destination (Baloglu and McCleary 1999). More specifically, word-of-mouth is considered to be one of the most influential information sources (Fodness and Murray 1997; Llodrà-Riera et al. 2015) together with online information sources (McCartney et al. 2008; Frías et al. 2012), taking into account Information and Communication Technologies paradigm (Buhalis and Law 2008a). Considering the dichotomy between online and offline information sources, Baloglu and McClearly (1999) concluded that offline information sources influence cognitive evaluations in the image formation process; and later, Li et al. (2009, p. 55) found that “active online information search may change participants’ destination image, particularly its affective aspects”. Regarding the amount of information sources consulted, previous research has concluded that superficial knowledge about a destination can be associated with the use of a lower number of information sources (Baloglu 2000; Baloglu and McCleary 1999). In particular, Gitelson and Crompton (1983) found that tourists that most seek excitement tended to use more types of information that those not seeking excitement. In summary, information sources can generate an improved destination image (Li et al. 2009).

3 Method

A total of 594 tourists were interviewed in Palafrugell, Costa Brava (Spain), between April and September 2014. The sample was stratified for each month according to the number of tourists visiting the destination in each period, and data collection was carried out on tablet computers. The survey included questions about sources of information and perceived image.

Six pre-defined information sources were used in a multiple-choice question in the questionnaire. Information sources, three of them were online information sources (official website, tourism blogs, search engines), and three offline sources (brochures, mass media, and word-of-mouth).

Perceived image of a destination was measured through photo elicitation (Matteucci 2013) and pictures were classified in three categories (Dilley 1986; Santos 1998): culture, heritage, and landscape. The pictures included in each category were selected in agreement with the local Destination Marketing Organization. For each category, four pictures of the destination were shown to the respondents (Fig. 1) with the question: “From the following picture categories, which is the most representative picture of the municipality of Palafrugell?”. Each respondent selected the one picture in each category they thought was the most representative.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Pictures by category

Full size image

To identify whether information sources were determinants for image selection, the average number of sources of information used and their typology were analysed. Thus, differentiation between online and offline information sources, as well their average number, were considered. ANOVA-tests were carried out in order to detect whether the average number of information sources varies according to the typology of the images. Additionally, since more than two images for each category exist, Bonferroni post hoc tests were also carried out, in order to detect significant differences between each pair of items.

The sample respondents’ profile (gender, age, education and place of residence) is shown in Table 1. Demographic information shows that there are slightly more females than males. The age range of most tourists is from 45 to 54 years old, followed by tourists between 35 and 44 years old, the majority having university studies. This is a destination with 37.6% national and 62.4% international tourists.

Table 1 Profile of respondents
Full size table

4 Results

Descriptive statistics (see Table 2) on online information sources show that 52% of tourists use search engines such as Google, 36% use the official website, and tourism blogs are used by 13%. Of the offline information sources, 42% use word-of-mouth, 12% use tourism brochures and 10% use mass media information (television, radio or newspaper). This means that tourists mainly use online information sources, as they may have more updated and wider range of information about the destination. However, word-of-mouth information is also relevant for deciding about the destination.

Table 2 Information sources
Full size table

The number of individuals that selected the most representative picture for each category in Fig. 1 is classified in Table 3. For the landscape category, the most selected image is “Beach”, comprising almost 45% of respondents, followed by “Calella”, chosen by one third of respondents, while “Walking path” and “Botanical Garden” are the least selected, and represent 14.5 and 7.3%, respectively.

Table 3 Selection of representative images for each category
Full size table

Heritage is the most discriminative category, where 63.4% of tourists chose “Lighthouse”. Secondly, “Market” was chosen by 31.2% of respondents, while 5.4% selected “Cork museum”. No one chose “Interpretation centre” as the most heritage representative image for the destination. The fact that none chose this picture, and only 5.4% selected the cork museum, is representative of the new heritage nodes in the destination. These have been brought into communication messages more recently.

Concerning culture, more than a half of respondents selected “Haveneres”, traditional music from the region, as the most representative image for this category. The second and third most selected images refer to gastronomy; while the least selected image was Josep Pla (1897–1981), a Catalan writer born in the analysed destination, by 7.3% of respondents.

Table 4 shows the most representative picture selected in each category and the average number of information sources used by the respondents. It shows the average number of online and offline information sources used for tourists who selected a specific image as the most representative for landscape, heritage and culture. Anova tests and their significances for both online and offline information sources in each category are shown at the bottom of Table 4.

Table 4 Average number of information sources used for the most representative image selected
Full size table

Significant differences among the most representative selected images for online and offline information sources in the different categories are found; with the exception of online information sources in culture category. This means that the image selected as most representative depends on the number of information sources used. For instance, for landscape category, respondents who selected Botanical Garden used an average of 1.44 online information sources, while respondents who selected Calella used an average of 0.79 online information sources. Concerning offline information sources, respondents who selected Botanical Garden used an average of 1.35 offline information sources, while respondents who selected Calella used an average of 0.41 offline information sources. The same interpretation can be made for the remaining categories.

These results suggest that the number of information sources used influences picture selection, for both online and offline information sources. Therefore, this means that information sources have an effect on the perceived tourist image; with the exception of online information sources for heritage, where no differences exist among the average number of online information sources used, taking into consideration the most representative image selected by tourists. In general, tourists who use less information sources, tend to select more pictures showing well-known destination attributes. For instance, in the case of landscape, a picture of Botanical garden was the image least selected (7.3%) and this corresponds to the highest average for the number of both online (1.442) and offline (1.349) information sources used.

Taking into consideration the influence of online and offline information sources on the decision-making process, correlations are studied to statically test whether the average number of information sources used influences picture selection. Results in Table 5 show that correlation coefficients between the number of on and offline information sources used, and the number of times a picture was selected as being the most representative are negative, for all three categories, corroborating the fact that tourists selecting pictures related to well-known destination attributes tend to use less online or offline information sources. This corroborates that the number of information sources used influences picture selection. Therefore, this means that information sources have an effect on the perceived tourist image. In this case, negative correlation coefficients mean that tourists, who use less information sources, tend to select more pictures showing well-known destination attributes.

Table 5 Correlations among information sources used and pictures selected
Full size table

Table 5 shows that the highest negative correlation coefficient is for offline information sources in landscape (−0.813) and heritage (−0.824) categories; while the correlation coefficient for offline information sources in culture (−0.144) is the lowest. Coefficients for landscape and heritage categories are the most similar for those using offline information sources; while for online information sources the similarities are between heritage and culture. There are notable differences, especially between the two types of information sources used for heritage category.

Comparing each pair of average number of information sources (online and offline) used for the most selected pictures in each category helps to detect homogeneity within online and offline information sources. This can be evaluated in order to identify which type of information sources, whether online or offline, use a more similar number of sources. In order to detect this information, multiple comparisons are made of the average number of online and offline information sources between each pair of images for all categories (landscape, heritage and culture), taking into account Bonferroni correction as a post hoc test.

Table 6a, b and c show the significant difference in Bonferroni post hoc tests among the averages for the number of online and offline information sources used (Table 4) in the landscape, heritage and culture categories, respectively. Values in the upper part of the table represent the difference in averages among pictures for online information sources, and differences in offline information sources averages are shown in the lower part.

Table 6a Bonferroni post-hoc tests for landscape
Full size table
Table 6b Bonferroni post-hoc tests for heritage
Full size table
Table 6c Bonferroni post-hoc tests for culture
Full size table

As an example of interpretation, Table 6a shows that for offline information sources, those who selected Calella (0.790 in Table 4) used statistically significant more information sources that those who selected the Botanical Garden (1.442 in Table 4). Results in Table 6a, b and c detect more statistical differences among averages of offline information sources than among online information sources; meaning that more differentiation among offline information sources exists; while for online information sources, there are fewer differences among the average number of information sources. Specifically, Table 6b shows no differences among averages of online information sources for heritage, which was also detected in the Anova test (p = 0.548) in Table 4.

Online information source tourists use more similar or a more homogenous number of information sources compared to offline information source users, who consult a more disperse number of information sources. For instance, for the heritage category (Table 4), the variation in the number of online information sources ranges between 0.94 and 1.09, while for offline it ranges from 0.611 and 1.156; the same pattern can be observed for the landscape and culture categories. It is also demonstrated by the Eta (η) comparison between online and offline information sources for landscape (ηonline = 167 < ηoffline = 0.341), heritage (ηonline = 0.045 < ηoffline = 0.167) and culture (ηonline = 0.245 < ηoffline = 0.323).

Thus, results suggest that the pictures for the offline information sources users are more fragmented. This indicates that they perceive more diverse images as being the most representative of the tourism destination.

Finally, in order to inspect whether the images most selected in one type of information source are also the most selected in the other, correlation coefficients (r) between online and offline information sources are carried out for each category.

Results show positive correlation coefficients of the averages between online and offline information sources used for landscape (r = 0.973), heritage (r = 0.803) and culture (r = 0.678). However, the degree to which it correlates varies. These findings are related to the concept of tourist image fragmentation (Camprubí et al. 2014), meaning that when online and offline information sources match (high correlation coefficients), more similar are the images induced through these sources, and therefore perceived by tourists. In the opposite situation, when differences exist between online and offline sources (low correlation coefficients), there is a higher dissonance or fragmentation in projected images. This means that the images are differently perceived by tourists, depending on the information sources used.

Thus, the highest correlation is found in the landscape category, so selecting the most representative image of the destination i.e. landscape, is very similar whether using online or offline information sources. However, in the case of culture, where the correlation is the lowest, there are more differences in the selection of the most representative image between the types of information sources used. For instance, the image with the highest average of offline information sources used is Josep Pla, while for online information sources, it is ‘black rice’.

5 Conclusion

Considering the relevance of information sources in the image formation process and as an influencing factor in decision-making, this study concludes that the real, perceived tourist image of a destination is affected by the fragmentation of tourism images transmitted through various information sources.

In particular, this study concludes that the number and types of information sources consulted influence cognitive evaluations on perceived tourist image. Consequently, a higher number of information sources means that the tourist has a deeper knowledge of the destination, and therefore he or she associates less well-known attributes to a destination, in contrast to tourists who have used a smaller number of information sources. At the same time, findings indicate that tourists perceive different tourist images depending on the information sources they have used. Online and offline information sources with various categories of pictures show different behaviour, concluding that, in these cases, a fragmentation among various projected images exists in the different information sources.

Therefore, fragmentation of emitted tourism images is widespread through information sources, which have effects on the images perceived by tourists. From the results of this study, it cannot be deduced that this fragmentation is a negative effect, as long as the attributes that are disseminated through various information sources and subsequently perceived by the tourists agree with the DMO’s communication strategy. As Camprubí et al. (2014) point out; emitted tourism images can be purposely fragmented with the purpose of positioning tourism destinations in different market segments.

Consequently, for marketers in tourism destinations, it is particularly useful to know whether fragmentation of the tourism image exists or not. The reasons for this are twofold: firstly, to determine if the attributes transmitted by certain information sources are in accordance with the destination strategy; and secondly, to see whether it helps determine an appropriate image strategy and the composition of the “image mix”. This refers to the continuum of factors that need to be taken into account to decide which agents will intervene in the formation of the tourist image, as well as the amount of money budgeted for image development, characteristics of target markets, demographic characteristics and timing (Gartner 1994), as well as the adaptation of these issues to the new online information sources paradigm (Camprubí et al. 2013).

At the same time, this study deepens knowledge of the concept of tourism image fragmentation and its possible influence on tourist perceived image perception. However, this is only a first approximation and future research should analyse these phenomenon more deeply. In this case, picture elicitation has been used as a tool to assess the attributes attached to perceived image of the destination. Future research can use other methodological tools in order to measure cognitive evaluations.

Additionally, considering that knowledge about differences between the use of online and offline information search is scarce (Ho et al. 2012); this study considers the differentiation between these two types of information sources, expanding knowledge of the influencing character of online and offline information sources. Future research could consider each information source individually and expand the number of information sources considered for analysis.