The Influences of Experiential Marketing Factors on Brand Trust, Brand Attachment, and Behavioral Intention: Focused on Integrated Resort Tourists

Abstract

Given the fierce competition and changes in the market environment, the integrated resort industry must devote more efforts to understanding tourists’ behavioral characteristics to develop appropriate marketing strategies. Thus, this study established an integrated model to examine the impacts of experiential marketing factors on brand trust, brand attachment, and behavioral intention to promote the sustainable development of the integrated resort business. An online survey on Korean tourists with integrated resort experience was conducted, and a total of 526 valid responses were obtained. The proposed model was investigated with SmartPLS 3.3.9 software. Results show that sense, feel, think, and relate affected brand trust, whereas only sense, think, and relate affected brand attachment. Moreover, behavioral intention was found to be influenced by both brand trust and brand attachment. The research findings hold practical and theoretical contributions for the integrated resort context.

1. Introduction

Integrated resort, a new form of tourist destination, provide various tourism products, including gaming (e.g., table games, slot machines, casino) and non-gaming services (e.g., convention center, shopping mall, restaurants, hotels, live shows) [1]. Unlike traditional casinos, integrated resorts which offer these various non-gaming facilities effectively provide employment, tourism, and economic development benefits to the community [2]. These economic developments have fueled the growth of the integrated resort industry in Asian countries, such as Philippines, Singapore, and South Korea (hereafter Korea) [3]. Data from the Korea Casino Association [4] show that in 2019, more than 6 million domestic and international casino tourists visited 17 integrated resorts in Korea and contributed over US $2.1 billion in casino revenues. Given the large contribution of casinos to total revenue, integrated resorts have primarily focused on gaming services. Interestingly, to avoid gambling addiction problems among tourists, the Korean government has implemented casino access limitations on domestic consumers whereby citizens can avail the non-gaming services of all the integrated resorts but can only avail of gaming services in one integrated resort (Kangwon Land). Therefore, the Korean integrated resort industry used to show more interest in accommodating international gaming tourists. However, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the total Korean casino revenues in 2021 dropped to US $0.8 billion, and the proportion of foreigner casino revenues decreased from 49.4% in 2019 to 34.3% in 2021 [4]. This dilemma has prompted the integrated resort industry to rethink the importance of position of domestic visitors and non-gaming services. Studies have suggested for integrated resorts to develop more non-gaming facilities to attract domestic tourists and reduce dependence on the gaming sector, especially for international clientele-only casino integrated resorts [1].

The current shifting of customer segments from international tourists to domestic ones necessitates the better understanding of their post-purchase behaviors and formulation of corresponding marketing strategies. A clear marketing strategy is crucial for a company to achieve competitive advantages and sustainable growth [5]. As a relatively new marketing paradigm, experiential marketing focuses on motivating customers’ purchasing decisions by offering multidimensional memorable experiences [6]. Brand attachment and brand trust, as the main objectives of brand management, represent the level of consumer–brand relationships [7]. This customer–brand relationship, formed by customers’ experience and perception of the brand, is the final affective response to a brand. Previous studies have applied experiential marketing and brand marketing to various consumption settings, such as the cultural and creative industry [8], online business [9], luxury product consumption [10], and tourism industry [11], and have confirmed the effectivity of the above two marketing strategies on encouraging customers’ purchase behaviors.

Literature about integrated resort tourists has mainly focused on experience satisfaction [12,13], behavioral characteristics [14], brand engagement [1], and perceived brand value [15]. However, limited research has assessed integrated resort tourists’ brand experience using the five-dimension experiential marketing modules. Moreover, studies on tourists’ emotional connections (e.g., brand trust, brand attachment) to a brand from a psychological perspective remain scant. Given these gaps in the literature, this study develops a comprehensive research framework combining experiential marketing and brand marketing to find out how tourists’ experience of Korean integrated resorts influences their brand trust, brand attachment, and behavioral intention. Further, in the special policy background (i.e., casino access limitations on Koreans), domestic tourists’ behavioral differences in the gaming available integrated resort and gaming unavailable integrated resorts have also been overlooked. Thus, this study employs a multi-group analysis to examine the model difference between gaming available and gaming unavailable tourists. These findings aid in the theoretical broadening and sustainable management of the integrated resort industry.

Figure 1 is a flowchart of this study.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Relationship between Experiential Marketing and Brand Trust

Experiential marketing originates from the study of Holbrook and Hirschman [16], which emphasized the importance of experience during consumption. For Yamamoto et al. [17], experiential marketing is a process where operators convince customers to purchase or recognize brands by providing a particular experience to develop emotional stimulation. Unlike traditional marketing that focuses on product functions, experiential marketing prefers to offer customers memorable experience [6]. Schmitt [6] divided experiential marketing into five dimensions: sense, feel, think, act, and relate. The sensory experience refers to experience obtained through sensory stimulation (e.g., touch, taste, visual, smell, sound). The feel experience includes emotions and feelings, such as joy, happiness, and anger. The think experience refers to customers’ creative cognition of things or objects. The act experience focuses on consumers’ behaviors, lifestyles, and interactions with others. Finally, the relate experience concentrates on an individual’s connection with external society. As a main concept and marketing tool of the experiential economy, experiential marketing has been widely discussed in the current tourism literature. Empirical studies on experiential marketing in different tourism settings have confirmed that it positively predicts tourist emotions [18], satisfaction [19,20], and loyalty [19,21].

According to Hsiao et al. [22], brand trust refers to consumers’ confidence about products or services provided by a brand. Generally, consumers show high level of brand trust when the brand is perceived as safe, trustable, and reliable [23]. Hassan et al. [24] posited that brand trust can reduce consumers’ perceived uncertainty about products, thus, help them make purchasing decisions. In the tourism context, tourists’ brand trust plays a prominent role in destination management. Han and Hyun [25] claimed that tourists will trust destinations where they feel comfortable. When the travel experience meets tourists’ expectations, they are more likely to show high brand trust [26]. Moreover, tourists’ brand trust can positively predict brand satisfaction, loyalty, and revisits [27,28,29,30], but negatively impact risk perception [31].

According to Swaminathan et al. [32], individuals prefer to believe in information obtained through direct personal experience rather than commercials. Agustin and Singh [33] stated that, through continuous interactive experience with a brand, customers will build positive perceptions and develop trust in it. Many scholars have identified the predictability of brand experience to brand trust [8,34,35,36]. Kim et al. [36] conducted a study on Korean private label apparel brand experience, and found that consumers’ sensory, emotional, behavioral, and intellectual experience had positive impact on their brand trust, satisfaction, and brand loyalty. Recently, Chen et al. [8], in their research on cultural and creative industry consumers, found that four dimensions (sensory, emotional, thinking, and relational experience) of experiential marketing positively influenced brand trust. Moreover, in the online business context, Rahmania and Wahyono [9] confirmed the positive connection between experiential marketing and brand trust. Additionally, the consistent research findings can also be found in Sulivyo and Ekasari’s [30] work. Based on these studies, this study postulates that experiential marketing likewise has a positive impact on brand trust. Thus, the following hypotheses are established:

Hypothesis 1-1.Sense positively affects brand trust.

Hypothesis 1-2.Feel positively affects brand trust.

Hypothesis 1-3.Think positively affects brand trust.

Hypothesis 1-4.Act positively affects brand trust.

Hypothesis 1-5.Relate positively affects brand trust.

2.2. Relationship between Experiential Marketing and Brand Attachment

According to Schmitt [37], brand attachment is a close emotional bond connecting consumers with a specific brand. Park et al. [38] argued that brand attachment is always related to consumers’ positive cognitions and emotions toward the brand. The attachment theory states that individuals’ attachment to an object affects the way they interact with it [39]. Consumers’ brand engagement also positively impacts brand attachment, in turn resulting to positive brand evaluation [39], behavioral commitment [40], brand love [10,41], brand equity [42], and brand loyalty [43]. Additionally, destination brand attachment can be influenced by service quality [44], nostalgia [45], and brand image [46].

According to Baldwin et al. [47], individuals develop attachment in the process of interacting with objects. Kang et al. [48] argued that great experiences lead to positive affective responses (such as satisfaction), which help consumers’ emotional connection with the brand. Moreover, satisfactory experiences play a powerful role in maintaining consumers’ emotional consistency toward a brand [49]. The positive connection between consumer experience and brand attachment has been discussed in recent and various studies [50,51,52]. As Wu and Lee [50] argued, tourists’ sensory, feel, act, and intellectual experience positively impacted their brand attachment. Prentice and Wong [51] found that casino tourists’ brand attachment has a positive relationship with the improvement of service experience. Further, Huaman-Ramirez and Merunka [52] also certified that experiential marketing is positively related to brand attachment. Teng and Chen [53] highlighted that restaurant customers’ memorable experiences can increase their brand attachment. Hence, this study anticipates that delivering tourists a positive experience may further promote their emotional attachment to a brand and the following hypotheses are postulated:

Hypothesis 2-1.Sense positively affects brand attachment.

Hypothesis 2-2.Feel positively affects brand attachment.

Hypothesis 2-3.Think positively affects brand attachment.

Hypothesis 2-4.Act positively affects brand attachment.

Hypothesis 2-5.Relate positively affects brand attachment.

2.3. Relationship between Brand Trust and Behavioral Intention

For Fishbein and Ajzen [54], behavioral intention means individuals′ intention to take a specific action, which is their subjective judgment about future behaviors. Visit and revisit intention, as well as recommendation intention are frequently used dimensions of behavioral intention in tourism industry research. Previous tourism studies have confirmed that behavioral intention is highly relevant to tourist satisfaction [55,56,57]. Meanwhile, affective and cognitive constructs are likewise powerful predictors of behavioral intention [58,59].

Brand trust directly and indirectly affect consumers’ purchase intention [60]. Swan et al. [61] claimed that customers’ brand trust can shape loyalty to the brand and further enhance purchase intention. Herbst et al. [62] identified brand trust as a main factor determining customers’ purchase intention. Moreover, Hilligoss and Rieh’s [63] study stressed the importance of experienced credibility, which plays an important role in predicting individuals’ behavior intentions (e.g., re-purchase intention and recommendation intention). Additionally, Abubakar and Ilkan [64] stated that individuals’ travel intention is strongly affected by their trust in a destination. Tourists prefer to visit destinations that are reliable and trustworthy [25]. Thus, the current study postulates the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 3.Brand trust positively affects behavioral intention.

2.4. Relationship between Brand Attachment and Behavioral Intention

According to Huang et al. (2017) [65], tourists can develop a strong attachment to a travel brand, for instance, destination brand [66] and tourism social media brand [67]. Yen et al. [68] proposed that consumers with high level of brand attachment are more likely to maintain a relationship with the brand. Various studies have examined the relationship between brand attachment and behavioral intention. Thomson, MacInnis, and Park [69] divided brand attachment into two dimensions: brand-self connection and brand prominence which can positively influence individuals’ travel decision. Moreover, brand attachment enhances both word-of-mouth and brand loyalty [70,71]. Further, Esch et al. [72] confirmed that brand attachment positively predicts both current purchase intention and future purchase intention. Additionally, Lin and Ku [73] argued that consumers’ luxury brand attachment strongly and positively effects their luxury consumption behaviors. This research thus presents the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 4.Brand attachment positively affects behavioral intentions.

2.5. Gaming Available Integrated Resort Tourists and Gaming Unavailable Integrated Resort Tourists

It is obvious that the domestic target markets of the aforementioned two kinds of Korean integrated resorts are different. Specifically, gaming available integrated resort accommodates domestic customers who are interested in gaming and non-gaming services, whereas gaming unavailable integrated resorts mainly focus on Koreans that what to enjoy a beautiful environment and various entertainment facilities. Song et al. [14] highlighted the importance of considering the behavioral difference of tourists with different demands and confirmed significant preference heterogeneity between gaming visitors and non-gaming visitors. Kruger and Saayman [74] also claimed that the two groups’ perception and behavioral response to an integrated resort can be influenced by their experience frequency. Moreover, Prentice and Li [75] found that the travel purpose of integrated resort tourists (gaming vs. non-gaming) moderated the relationships between gaming experience and place attachment, non-gaming experience and behavioral intention, place attachment and customer spending. Given that significant differences exist in the service contents offered by gaming available and gaming unavailable integrated resorts, tourists’ purpose of visiting the two different types of integrated resorts are apparently distinct. Therefore, this study assumes that significant differences exist between gaming available and gaming unavailable integrated resorts in the relationships among tourists’ experiential marketing, brand trust, brand attachment, and behavioral intention. The following hypothesis is presented:

Hypothesis 5.The type of integrated resort moderates the relationships among tourists’ experiential marketing, brand trust, brand attachment, and behavioral intention.

Based on the literature and hypotheses, a research model is proposed as depicted in Figure 2.

3. Research Method

3.1. Study Sites

In this study, the top 3 nationwide integrated resorts (Kangwon Land, Paradise City, and Jeju Shinhwa World) of Korea were selected as study sites. Of the 17 total integrated resorts in Korea, Kangwon Land is the only one with casino facilities available for Koreans. It covers an area of 12,793 m², with ski slopes, golf course, water park, casino, and 6 hotels [76]. In 2018, over 2.8 million tourists visited Kangwon Land and contributed revenues of over US $980.1 million [77]. Unlike Kangwon Land, Paradise City and Jeju Shinhwa World are exclusive for foreigners. Paradise City has four branches with total 14,161 m², attracting roughly 1 million visitors and achieving revenues of over US $447.7 million in 2018 [77]. Jeju Shinhwa World is located in the hottest destination of Korea (Jeju Island) and covers 5581 m² [77]. In 2018, Jeju Shinhwa World attracted 0.17 million travelers, bringing revenues of over US $269.2 million to the resort [77]. Data from the Korea Tourism Knowledge and Information System show that the total revenues of the above 3 integrated resorts accounted for 80.1% of the total revenues of Korean integrated resort industry in 2018 [77]. Thus, Kangwon Land, Paradise City, and Jeju Shinhwa World are considered ideal places to examine the relationships among the experience, brand trust, brand attachment, and behavioral intention of Korean integrated resort tourists, therefore leading to findings that can be generalized in other integrated resorts.

3.2. Measures

The questionnaire of this study comprises 31 measurement items adapted from previous literature. Specifically, experiential marketing was measured in five dimensions: sense (4 items), feel (3 items), think (5 items), act (3 items), and relate (4 items) adapted from previous study [19,52]. Brand trust (3 items) and brand attachment (4 items) were measured based on Kang al.’s [48] research. Last, behavioral intention consisted of 5 items adopted from Lee and Chang [78] and Xu et al. [79]. Basic demographic information was also included in the questionnaire. All items were presented using a 5-point Likert-scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Given that the items were based on the original English research, they were first translated into Korean and then back-translated into English by three tourist scholars who are fluent in Korean and English to ensure translation equivalence. On readability of the survey instrument, a pre-test was employed with 25 tourism graduate students with experience on integrated resort.

3.3. Data Collection and Analysis

In this research, the targeted population were Korean adults who were patrons of Kangwon Land, Paradise City, and Jeju Shinhwa World in the past 12 months. As the largest research firm in Korea, Embrain has over 6 million panelists all over the world [80]. Thus, this study conducted an online survey with the support of Embrain from 7 January to 20 February 2020. Samples of this study were randomly chosen on the basis of the proportion of the regional population. The survey invitations were sent to the general respondents. Hence, 526 completed responses were received and were used for later data analysis. Among the 526 respondents, 318 respondents (60.5%) had a last integrated resort experience of Kangwon Land in the past 12 months, and the remaining 208 respondents (39.5%) belonged to Paradise City and Jeju Shinhwa World. As mentioned earlier, the visitor number of Kangwon Land was larger than the total visitor number of Paradise City and Jeju Shinhwa World in 2018. Additionally, it should be noted that the respondents of Kangwon Land included both gaming and non-gaming visitors, whereas those of Paradise City and Jeju Shinhwa World were only non-gaming visitors. Therefore, the sample sizes of the gaming available group and gaming unavailable group in this study are acceptable.

The collected data were first analyzed using SPSS 25.0 [81] for basic descriptive analysis. By running SmartPLS 3.3.9 [82], partial least squares structural equation model (PLS-SEM) was used to test the measurement and structural models and the proposed hypotheses. Moreover, a multi-group analysis was also conducted to examine the path difference between the gaming available tourists and gaming unavailable tourists.

4. Results

4.1. Respondents’ Profile

The respondents’ demographic characteristics are presented in Table 1. The proportion of females (49.6%) was similar to that of males (50.4%). Each age group was spread out evenly across (about 20.0%). Most (66.5%) of the respondents were married whereas about half (49.0%) of them were office workers. For monthly incomes, the 2.00–2.99 million Korean Won group and the 3.00–3.99 million Korean Won group were the largest, both with the proportion of 21.3%. In terms of last travel experience of integrated resort in the past 12 months, 60.5% of the respondents visited the Korean gaming available integrated resort.

4.2. Measurement Model

PLS-SEM algorithm using the software SmartPLS 3.3.9 [82] was conducted to assess the proposed research model of this study. As noted in the extant PLS literature [83], this study evaluated the proposed measurement model based on the following criteria: factor loading (>0.70), composite reliability (CR, >0.70), rho_A (>0.70), average variance extracted (AVE, >0.50) and Cronbach’s α (>0.70). Discriminant validity was assessed using the heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) ratio value (<0.90) [83]. The HTMT ratio refers to the mean value of the item correlations across constructs relative to the (geometric) mean of the average correlations for the items measuring the same construct [84].

Table 2 presents the reliability and validity analysis results of the measurement model in this study. Factor loadings, CR, rho_A, and Cronbach’s α values were all above the recommended value of 0.70, confirming internal reliability. Moreover, the AVE values surpassed the cut-off value of 0.50, proving convergent validity. As shown in Table 3, all the HTMT ratios were below 0.90, thus confirming the discriminant validity of the model.

4.3. Structural Model and Hypothesis Testing

The assessment of the structural model was executed by implementing bootstrapping with 5000 subsamples using SmartPLS 3.3.9 [82]. Hair et al. [83] recommended the following criteria in establishing the structural model fits: variance inflation factor (VIF, <3.0), coefficient of determination (R², >0.25), and the blindfolding-based cross-validated redundancy measure (Q², >0). Table 4 shows the estimation results of the structure model. All VIF estimates for the constructs in this study were below the required criterion of 3.0, indicating no multi-collinearity problems. All R² values ranged from 0.477 to 0.582, indicating a satisfactory predictive power of the proposed model. All Q² values were greater than 0, confirming the acceptable predictive accuracy of the proposed model.

Figure 3 shows that sense (β = 0.235, p < 0.001), feel (β = 0.191, p < 0.01), think (β = 0.182, p < 0.01), and relate (β = 0.222, p < 0.001) positively affected brand trust, while act did not affect brand trust significantly, thus, supporting Hypothesis 1-1, Hypothesis 1-2, Hypothesis 1-3, and Hypothesis 1-5, except for Hypothesis 1-4. Meanwhile, sense (β = 0.178, p < 0.001), think (β = 0.182, p < 0.01), and relate (β = 0.222, p < 0.001) positively affected brand attachment, while feel and act did not affect brand attachment significantly. Therefore, Hypothesis 2-1, Hypothesis 2-3, and Hypothesis 2-5 were confirmed, while Hypothesis 2-2 and Hypothesis 2-4 were rejected. Additionally, brand trust (β = 0.326, p < 0.001) and brand attachment (β = 0.517, p < 0.001) positively affected behavioral intention. Hence, Hypothesises 3 and 4 were supported.

4.4. Multi-Group Analysis

Furthermore, the multi-group analysis was employed using SmartPLS 3.3.9 [82] to estimate structural model differences between the gaming available group and gaming unavailable group. Before the multi-group analysis, the measurement invariance assessment was needed. To test the measurement invariance, this study executed the MICOM procedure which includes three steps: configural invariance, compositional invariance, and equality of composite mean values and variances [85]. Given that this study assessed the path models of two groups using identical indicators, data treatment, and algorithm settings, configural invariance of the constructs in the proposed model was demonstrated. Table 5 shows that all the original correlations were not lower than the 5.00% quantile correlations, indicating compositional invariance. Due to the mean original difference values of sense and think being out of the range of the 95% confidence interval boundaries (see Table 6), only partial invariance was confirmed.

Schlägel and Sarstedt [86] suggested that multi-group analysis is accessible if partial invariance was established. Following Table 7, for gaming available tourists, sense, feel, act, and relate positively affected brand trust; sense, feel, think, and relate positively impacted brand attachment. Meanwhile, for gaming unavailable tourists, sense, think, and relate positively influenced brand trust and brand attachment. Moreover, behavioral intention was positively influenced by brand trust and brand attachment for both groups. For the difference between them, the relationships between think and brand attachment, act and brand attachment indicated significant differences between both groups. Hence, Hypothesis 5 was partly supported.

5. Conclusions and Implications

The fierce competition and the slump in international tourists in unprecedented times such as a pandemic have compelled the integrated resort industry to greatly consider the expansion of the domestic market. To attract new customers and retain the old ones, integrated resorts should strive to develop appropriate marketing strategies. Hence, this study established a comprehensive research model by combining experiential marketing and brand marketing to explore the roles the two marketing strategies play in integrated resort tourists’ decision-making processes. Moreover, considering that not all the integrated resorts in Korea are allowed to provide gaming services, this research investigated tourists’ behavioral difference based on the integrated resort types. Results show that sense, feel, think, and relate all affected brand trust, which were similar to Kim et al. [36] and Chen et al.’s [8] research. Brand attachment was found to be influenced by sense, think, and relate, coinciding with Wu and Lee’s [50] findings. Both brand trust and brand attachment impacted behavioral intention, confirming the findings of previous studies [68,87]. Finally, the two groups presented significant differences in the effects of think and act on brand attachment.

5.1. Theoretical Implications

The present study provides the following theoretical implications. First, following existing literature, this empirical research focused on the integrated resort context confirmed the catalytic role of experiential marketing in developing brand trust and attachment, and the positive effects of experiential marketing and brand marketing on behavioral intention. This mirrors previous studies in the areas of emerging service [7], mobile phone sale [88], and fashion consumption [89], demonstrating the robustness of the research model. Thus, this study provides an important empirical reference and guideline for future integrated resort research and contributes to predicting tourists’ behavioral intentions when an integrated resort implements marketing strategies.

Second, this research is an early exploration of the behavioral difference between Korean tourists of gaming available and gaming unavailable integrated resort. The findings provide novel insights for integrated resort managers and marketers by identifying the unique behavioral characteristics of tourists from different integrated resort categories. Hence, the study extends the existing integrated resort literature and serves as a theoretical foundation of future marketing studies.

5.2. Practical Implications

The present research can provide some practical implications useful for integrated resort managers. First, following the results of path analysis on the total samples and results of multi-group analysis, among the five dimensions of experiential marketing, sense and relate positively impacted brand trust and attachment, both of which in turn positively affected behavioral intention. Therefore, integrated resorts should make efforts to provide better sensory stimulation experience and more social interaction chances to enhance tourists’ trust and attachment, ultimately improving their travel intentions. For example, integrated resorts are suggested to increase various recreation facilities (such as theme parks or ski slopes), events, and landscapes and create a relaxing and interesting atmosphere to attract tourists. In this aspect, previous research has found that tourists prefer integrated resorts with more recreation and sightseeing opportunities, especially for family-oriented tourists [14,90]. Moreover, diverse co-creation activities (e.g., sharing travel experience on social networks) are considered effective marketing promotion where tourists can establish relations with operators and identification with external society [19]. This kind of experience consequently helps tourists develop attachment to integrated resorts, thereby increasing their loyalty [19].

Second, for a reliable integrated resort brand management, responsible gambling strategies are critical because individuals are willing to trust a brand that engages in resolving social problems [91]. Thus, programs, such as providing gamblers with self-diagnosis assistance on gambling addiction and implementing self-exclusion or self-limitation policies on gamblers and employees [92], are necessary for integrated resorts to minimize the harmful influence of gambling on individuals, communities, and society at large. Furthermore, as a new mechanism for evaluating a company’s sustainability and societal efforts, environment, social, and governance (ESG) practices are industry suggestions because travelers may become wary of destinations with a disappointing ESG performance [93].

Finally, the segmentation approach based on respondents from gaming available and gaming unavailable integrated resorts provided meaningful information for marketers of both resort types. To be more specific, given that the act experience presented a positive effect on brand attachment only in the gaming available group, these integrated resorts must focus on providing remarkable events and activities to improve tourists’ behavioral participations. Additionally, for gaming unavailable integrated resorts, considering the positive relationship between think and brand attachment for this group only, innovative and intelligent service facilities (e.g., intelligent robots and AI) and systems can bring a pleasant and specific tourist cognitive experience.

5.3. Limitations and Future Research Directions

Samples of this study were limited to Korean respondents. Given that the gambling business in most Korean integrated resorts are restricted to Koreans, the effect of international tourists cannot be ignored especially after the COVID-19 pandemic. Thus, future research is strongly advised to examine foreigner customers to help the industry better understand the behavioral features of their entire customer base. Further, following previous studies [94], demographic variables of customers may affect their brand choice behaviors. It is therefore necessary to incorporate demographic variables, such as income and visit times, into future research models. Moreover, this study employed a segmentation criterion based on whether an integrated resort provides a gaming service for Korean tourists. Given that customers’ overall satisfaction and loyalty to an integrated resort were impacted by various transaction-specific services, such as hotels, shopping malls, casinos, food, and beverage services [3], future research can incorporate these services into segmentation bases to afford a better understanding of different kinds of tourists’ behavioral preferences in integrated resorts. Additionally, studies [1,94] have found that tourists’ experience is greatly related to their cognitive, affective brand engagement and co-creation behaviors, which can improve their revisit intention. Thus, future research can add tourists’ brand engagement behavior into this study model and the results may provide greater insights for integrated resort marketers. Last, this research collected data using an online survey, which may have a self-selection bias problem. Future studies are recommended to adopt the field survey method to address this limitation.

Author Contributions

Methodology, software, and writing, W.X.; idea, data collection, and formal analysis, H.J.; idea, review, editing, and supervision, J.H. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data sharing not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures and Tables

Figure 1. Flowchart of this study.

Figure 2. Proposed research model.

Figure 3. Results of SEM. Note: Numbers in the parenthesis are t-values. Dotted lines indicate insignificant paths. ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.

Table 1

Profile of respondents.

Characteristics	n = 526	%	Characteristics	n = 526	%
Gender			Education
Male	265	50.4	Middle/high school	70	13.3
Female	261	49.6	College	390	74.1
Monthly income (KRW)			University	63	12.0
<2.00 million	100	19.0	Graduate school	3	0.6
2.00–2.99 million	112	21.3	Occupation
3.00–3.99 million	112	21.3	Office worker	258	49.0
4.00–4.99 million	75	14.3	Service worker	29	5.5
5.00–5.99 million	53	10.1	Civil servant	17	3.2
>5.99 million	74	14.1	Self-employed	2	0.4
Age			Production worker/technician	24	4.6
20–29	101	19.2	Student	77	14.6
30–39	109	20.7	Housewife	30	5.7
40–49	101	19.2	Professional	51	9.7
50–59	108	20.5	Other	38	7.2
>59	107	20.3	Last visited integrated resort type
Marital status			Gaming available integrated resort	318	60.5
Single	176	33.5	Gaming unavailable integrated resort	208	39.5
Married	350	66.5

Table 2

Validity and reliability assessment.

Factors and Items	Factor Loading	Cronbach’s α	CR	AVE
Sense		0.735	0.834	0.557
This integrated resort attracts my visual attention.	0.706
This integrated resort is perceptually interesting.	0.756
This integrated resort is full of sensory appeal.	0.782
This integrated resort makes positive impressions on my visual sense or other senses.	0.740
Feel		0.791	0.878	0.705
This integrated resort makes me responds in an emotional manner.	0.833
This integrated resort induces agreeable feelings and sentiments.	0.862
I have positive emotions for this integrated resort.	0.825
Think		0.809	0.867	0.567
This integrated resort makes me think.	0.777
I engage in a lot of thinking in this integrated resort.	0.778
This integrated resort stimulates my curiosity.	0.736
This integrated resort stimulates my creative thinking.	0.704
This integrated resort intrigues me.	0.768
Act		0.761	0.863	0.677
I would like to take pictures in this integrated resort as mementos.	0.802
I would like to share experiences in this integrated resort.	0.858
I would like to engage in activities in this integrated resort.	0.807
Relate		0.763	0.849	0.585
This integrated resort induces in me a sense of identity.	0.757
This integrated resort reminds me of social arrangements.	0.816
This integrated resort makes me think about relationships.	0.736
I can relate to other people through visiting this integrated resort.	0.747
Brand trust		0.797	0.881	0.711
What this integrated resort promotes about its service is true.	0.837
If this integrated resort makes a claim about its service, it is true.	0.852
This integrated resort is very reliable.	0.841
Brand attachment		0.818	0.880	0.647
I really love this integrated resort.	0.834
I would really miss this integrated resort if it disappeared.	0.803
This integrated resort is special to me.	0.768
This integrated resort is more than a product/service to me.	0.811
Behavioral intention		0.849	0.892	0.624
I would like to revisit this integrated resort.	0.737
I would like to recommend this integrated resort to others.	0.771
I would like to invest money and time into revisiting this integrated resort.	0.811
This integrated resort is a top choice of my future travel.	0.829
I would like to share positive information about this integrated resort to others.	0.799

Note: CR = composite reliability; AVE = average variance extracted.

Table 3

Discriminant validity assessment.

	Sense	Feel	Think	Act	Relate	Brand Trust	BrandAttachment	Behavioral Intention
Sense
Feel	0.854
Think	0.765	0.832
Act	0.644	0.796	0.879
Relate	0.729	0.742	0.819	0.840
Brand trust	0.758	0.739	0.722	0.621	0.731
Brand attachment	0.716	0.656	0.779	0.722	0.856	0.764
Behavioral intention	0.695	0.789	0.818	0.852	0.833	0.786	0.857

Table 4

Structural model estimation.

	VIF			R2	Q2
	Brand Trust	Brand Attachment	Behavioral Intention
Sense	1.967	1.967
Feel	2.415	2.415
Think	2.646	2.646
Act	2.321	2.321
Relate	2.099	2.099
Brand trust			1.624	0.477	0.332
Brand attachment			1.624	0.550	0.348
Behavioral intention				0.582	0.359

Note: VIF = variance inflation factor; R² = coefficient of determination; Q² = cross-validated redundancy.

Table 5

Compositional invariance assessment.

	OriginalCorrelation	5% QuantileCorrelations	Compositional Invariance
Sense	0.999	0.996	Yes
Feel	1.000	0.998	Yes
Think	0.998	0.998	Yes
Act	0.999	0.996	Yes
Relate	0.998	0.997	Yes
Brand trust	1.000	0.999	Yes
Brand attachment	1.000	0.999	Yes
Behavioral intention	0.999	0.999	Yes

Table 6

Composite mean values and variances assessment.

	Mean—Original Difference	95%ConfidenceInterval	EqualMeanValues	Variance—OriginalDifference	95%ConfidenceInterval	Equal Variances
Sense	−0.174	[−0.178; 0.186]	Yes	−0.040	[−0.299; 0.299]	Yes
Feel	−0.165	[−0.177; 0.166]	Yes	−0.271	[−0.308; 0.299]	Yes
Think	−0.182	[−0.178; 0.169]	No	0.017	[−0.263; 0.272]	Yes
Act	−0.154	[−0.159; 0.173]	Yes	0.082	[−0.276; 0.277]	Yes
Relate	−0.012	[−0.181; 0.163]	Yes	−0.215	[−0.267; 0.241]	Yes
Brand trust	−0.045	[−0.184; 0.154]	Yes	0.018	[−0.272; 0.303]	Yes
Brand attachment	−0.027	[−0.175; 0.163]	Yes	−0.124	[−0.305; 0.314]	Yes
Behavioral intention	−0.072	[−0.184; 0.171]	Yes	−0.146	[−0.289; 0.283]	Yes

Table 7

Multi-group analysis results.

Path	Gaming Available Group	GamingUnavailableGroup	95%ConfidenceInterval	Permutation p-Values	Supported
Sense → Brand trust	0.216 **	0.257 **	[−0.207; 0.203]	0.694	No
Feel → Brand trust	0.212 **	0.122	[−0.231; 0.225]	0.467	No
Think → Brand trust	0.170 *	0.217 **	[−0.245; 0.232]	0.721	No
Act → Brand trust	−0.085	0.098	[−0.229; 0.239]	0.126	No
Relate → Brand trust	0.276 ***	0.168 *	[−0.205; 0.196]	0.307	No
Sense → Brand attachment	0.157 **	0.231 **	[−0.177; 0.170]	0.419	No
Feel → Brand attachment	0.060	−0.135	[−0.216; 0.128]	0.087	No
Think → Brand attachment	0.108	0.389 ***	[−0.256; 0.273]	0.031	Yes
Act → Brand attachment	0.187 **	−0.030	[−0.184; 0.204]	0.026	Yes
Relate → Brand attachment	0.397 ***	0.361 ***	[−0.208; 0.193]	0.724	No
Brand trust → Behavioral intention	0.270 ***	0.405 ***	[−0.174; 0.179]	0.148	No
Brand attachment → Behavioral intention	0.578 ***	0.438 ***	[−0.173; 0.169]	0.104	No

Note: *** p < 0.001; ** p < 0.01; * p < 0.05.

References

1. Ahn, J.; Back, K.J. Antecedents and consequences of customer brand engagement in integrated resorts. Int. J. Hosp. Manag.; 2018; 75, pp. 144-152. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.05.020]

2. Eadington, W.R. Capital, rent-seeking, and risk taking in the casino industry and the economy at large. Int. Gambl. Stud.; 2009; 9, pp. 181-187. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14459790903348210]

3. Gao, B.W.; Lai, I.K.W. The effects of transaction-specific satisfactions and integrated satisfaction on customer loyalty. Int. J. Hosp. Manag.; 2015; 44, pp. 38-47.

4. Korea Casino Association. Casino industry performance status in 2021. Available online: http://koreacasino.or.kr/kcasino/info/infoStatisticsView.do?bbsSeq=1102&currentPage=1&snsLink=http%3A%2F%2Fkoreacasino.or.kr%2Fkcasino%2Finfo%2FinfoStatistics.do&ShareUrl= (accessed on 30 June 2022).

5. Grönroos, C. Conceptualising value co-creation: A journey to the 1970s and back to the future. J. Mark. Manag.; 2012; 28, pp. 1520-1534. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2012.737357]

6. Schmitt, B. Experiential marketing. J. Mark. Manag.; 1999; 15, pp. 53-67. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1362/026725799784870496]

7. Ahn, J.; Back, K.J. Influence of brand relationship on customer attitude toward integrated resort brands: A cognitive, affective, and conative perspective. J. Travel Tour. Mark.; 2018; 35, pp. 449-460. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2017.1358239]

8. Chen, C.C.; Su, P.R.; Jiang, J.S.; Lin, M.H. Research on the impact of cultural and creative industry experiential marketing on brand trust and customer loyalty. Inter. J. Organ. Innov.; 2022; 14, pp. 295-309.

9. Rahmania, M.A.; Wahyono, W. Interaction of E-service quality, experiential marketing, trust, and satisfaction on repurchase intention. Manag. Anal. J.; 2022; 11, pp. 71-82. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.15294/maj.v11i1.54279]

10. Shetty, K.; Fitzsimmons, J.R. The effect of brand personality congruence, brand attachment and brand love on loyalty among HENRY’s in the luxury branding sector. J. Fash. Mark. Manag.; 2021; 26, pp. 21-35. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JFMM-09-2020-0208]

11. Ahn, J. Consideration of rosy-and blue-side attachment with integrated resort brands. J. Destin. Mark. Manag.; 2019; 13, pp. 1-9. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2019.05.001]

12. Yuan, Y.H.E.; Wu, C.K. Relationships among experiential marketing, experiential value, and customer satisfaction. J. Hosp. Tour. Res.; 2008; 32, pp. 387-410. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1096348008317392]

13. Yeh, T.M.; Chen, S.H.; Chen, T.F. The relationships among experiential marketing, service innovation, and customer satisfaction—A case study of tourism factories in Taiwan. Sustainability; 2019; 11, 1041. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su11041041]

14. Song, H.; Wang, J.; Lyu, S.O. Willingness to pay for casino-based integrated resorts: A choice experiment. J. Destin. Mark. Manag.; 2021; 19, 100555. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2021.100555]

15. Ahn, J.; Thomas, T.K. The role of customers’ perceived values of integrated resort brands in destination. J. Destin. Mark. Manag.; 2020; 15, 100403. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2019.100403]

16. Holbrook, M.B.; Hirschman, E.C. The experiential aspects of consumption: Consumer fantasies, feelings, and fun. J. Consum Res.; 1982; 9, pp. 132-140. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1086/208906]

17. Yamamoto, P.Y.; de Oliveira Cordova, M.L.; Mazzei, L.C. Description of a case involving experiential marketing through sports sponsorship in the B2B segment. Podium Sport Leis. Tour. Rev.; 2018; 7, pp. 64-79. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5585/tlsr.v7i1.249]

18. Tsaur, S.H.; Chiu, Y.T.; Wang, C.H. The visitors behavioral consequences of experiential marketing: An empirical study on Taipei Zoo. J. Travel Tour. Mark.; 2006; 21, pp. 47-64. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J073v21n01_04]

19. Chen, A.H.; Wu, R.Y. Mediating effect of brand image and satisfaction on loyalty through experiential marketing: A case study of a sugar heritage destination. Sustainability; 2022; 14, 7122. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su14127122]

20. Asbar, Y.; Biby, S.; Razif, R.; Nurhayati, N. The influence of experiential marketing, experiential value and brand trust on customer satisfaction telkomsel simpati card in the city of Lhokseumawe. Int. J. Educ. Rev. Law Soc. Sci.; 2022; 2, pp. 595-604.

21. Kao, Y.F.; Huang, L.S.; Wu, C.H. Effects of theatrical elements on experiential quality and loyalty intentions for theme parks. Asia Pac. J. Tour. Res.; 2008; 13, pp. 163-174. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10941660802048480]

22. Hsiao, C.H.; Chang, J.J.; Tang, K.Y. Exploring the influential factors in continuance usage of mobile social Apps: Satisfaction, habit, and customer value perspectives. Telemat. Inform.; 2016; 33, pp. 342-355. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2015.08.014]

23. Amyx, D.; Bhuian, S.N.; Shows, G.D. Customer-salespeople relationship: Influence of salespeople entrepreneurial behaviours. Mark. Intel. Plan.; 2016; 34, pp. 586-604. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MIP-09-2015-0170]

24. Hassan, M.; Bin Nadeem, A.; Akhter, A. Impact of workplace spirituality on job satisfaction: Mediating effect of trust. Cogent Bus. Manag.; 2016; 3, 1189808. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2016.1189808]

25. Han, H.; Hyun, S.S. Customer retention in the medical tourism industry: Impact of quality, satisfaction, trust, and price reasonableness. Tour. Manag.; 2015; 46, pp. 20-29. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2014.06.003]

26. Rosalina, V. Mobile customer relationship management (m-CRM) application development in MSMEs Indonesia. J. Phys. Conf. Ser.; 2019; 1179, 012090. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1179/1/012090]

27. Eastlick, M.A.; Lotz, S.L.; Warrington, P. Understanding online B-to-C relationships: An integrated model of privacy concerns, trust, and commitment. J. Bus. Res.; 2006; 59, pp. 877-886. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.02.006]

28. Singh, J.; Sirdeshmukh, D. Agency and trust mechanisms in consumer satisfaction and loyalty judgments. J. Acad. Mark. Sci.; 2000; 28, pp. 150-167. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0092070300281014]

29. Su, L.; Hsu, M.K.; Marshall, K.P. Understanding the relationship of service fairness, emotions, trust, and tourist behavioral intentions at a city destination in China. J. Travel Tour. Mark.; 2014; 31, pp. 1018-1038. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2014.892466]

30. Sulivyo, L.; Ekasari, A. Impact of experiential marketing and perceived quality on brand loyalty with brand trust as mediation. Int. J. Multicult. Multirelig. Underst.; 2021; 8, pp. 397-409. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18415/ijmmu.v8i8.2745]

31. Kim, H.B.; Kim, T.T.; Shin, S.W. Modeling roles of subjective norms and eTrust in customers’ acceptance of airline B2C eCommerce websites. Tour. Manag.; 2009; 30, pp. 266-277. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2008.07.001]

32. Swaminathan, V.; Fox, R.J.; Reddy, S.K. The impact of brand extension introduction on choice. J. Mark.; 2001; 65, pp. 1-15. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.65.4.1.18388]

33. Agustin, C.; Singh, J. Curvilinear effects of consumer loyalty determinants in relational exchanges. J. Mark. Res.; 2005; 42, pp. 96-108. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.42.1.96.56961]

34. Sahin, A.; Zehir, C.; Kitapçı, H. The effects of brand experiences, trust and satisfaction on building brand loyalty: An empirical research on global brands. Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sci.; 2011; 24, pp. 1288-1301. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.09.143]

35. Kim, R.B.; Chao, Y. Effects of brand experience, brand image and brand trust on brand building process: The case of Chinese millennial generation consumers. J. Inter. Stud.; 2019; 12, pp. 9-21. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.14254/2071-8330.2019/12-3/1]

36. Kim, R.B.; Yoon, D.H.; Yan, C. Effects of brand experience on brand trust, brand satisfaction & brand loyalty: Building SPA brands in South Korea. Actual Probl. Econ.; 2015; 168, pp. 182-189.

37. Schmitt, B. The consumer psychology of brands. J. Consum. Psychol.; 2012; 22, pp. 7-17. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2011.09.005]

38. Park, C.W.; MacInnis, D.J.; Priester, J.R. Beyond attitudes: Attachment and consumer behavior. Seoul Natl. J.; 2006; 12, pp. 3-36.

39. Belaid, S.; Behi, A.T. The role of attachment in building consumer-brand relationships: An empirical investigation in the utilitarian consumption context. J. Prod. Br. Manag.; 2011; 20, pp. 37-47. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10610421111108003]

40. Levy, S.; Hino, H. Emotional brand attachment: A factor in customer-bank relationships. Inter. J. Bank Mark.; 2016; 34, pp. 136-150. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJBM-06-2015-0092]

41. Gómez-Suárez, M. Examining customer–brand relationships: A critical approach to empirical models on brand attachment, love, and engagement. Adm. Sci.; 2019; 9, 10. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/admsci9010010]

42. Chen, X.; You, E.; Lee, T.; Li, X. The influence of historical nostalgia on a heritage destination’s brand authenticity, brand attachment, and brand equity. Int. J. Tour. Res.; 2021; 23, pp. 1176-1190. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jtr.2477]

43. Li, M.W.; Teng, H.Y.; Chen, C.Y. Unlocking the customer engagement-brand loyalty relationship in tourism social media: The roles of brand attachment and customer trust. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag.; 2020; 44, pp. 184-192. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2020.06.015]

44. Alexandris, K.; Kouthouris, C.; Meligdis, A. Increasing customers’ loyalty in a skiing resort: The contribution of place attachment and service quality. Inter. J. Cont. Hosp. Manag.; 2006; 18, pp. 414-425. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09596110610673547]

45. Heinberg, M.; Katsikeas, C.S.; Ozkaya, H.E.; Taube, M. How nostalgic brand positioning shapes brand equity: Differences between emerging and developed markets. J. Acad. Mark. Sci.; 2020; 48, pp. 869-890. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11747-019-00637-x]

46. Chen, C.Y. Influence of celebrity involvement on place attachment: Role of destination image in film tourism. Asia Pac. J. Tour. Res.; 2018; 23, pp. 1-14. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2017.1394888]

47. Baldwin, M.W.; Keelan, J.P.R.; Fehr, B.; Enns, V.; Koh-Rangarajoo, E. Social-cognitive conceptualization of attachment working models: Availability and accessibility effects. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol.; 1996; 71, 94. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.1.94]

48. Kang, J.; Manthiou, A.; Sumarjan, N.; Tang, L. An investigation of brand experience on brand attachment, knowledge, and trust in the lodging industry. J. Hosp. Mark. Manag.; 2017; 26, pp. 1-22. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2016.1172534]

49. Mikulincer, M.; Shaver, P.R. Attachment theory and emotions in close relationships: Exploring the attachment-related dynamics of emotional reactions to relational events. Pers. Rel.; 2005; 12, pp. 149-168. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1350-4126.2005.00108.x]

50. Wu, S.Y.; Lee, K.Y. The effect of hotel brand experience on brand trust, brand attachment and brand commitment. J. Korea Cont. Assoc.; 2016; 16, pp. 410-421. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5392/JKCA.2016.16.12.410]

51. Prentice, C.; Wong, I.A. Embracing or fighting the urge: A multilevel investigation on casino service, branding and impulsive gambling. Int. J. Hosp. Manag.; 2016; 56, pp. 109-118. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2016.04.009]

52. Huaman-Ramirez, R.; Merunka, D. Brand experience effects on brand attachment: The role of brand trust, age, and income. Eur. Bus. Rev.; 2019; 31, pp. 610-645. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EBR-02-2017-0039]

53. Teng, H.Y.; Chen, C.Y. Restaurant innovativeness and brand attachment: The role of memorable brand experience. J. Hosp. Tour. Res.; 2021; pp. 1-24. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/10963480211042065]

54. Ajzen, I.; Fishbein, M. A Bayesian analysis of attribution processes. Psychol. Bull.; 1975; 82, 261. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0076477]

55. Del Bosque, I.R.; San Martín, H. Tourist satisfaction a cognitive-affective model. Ann. Tour. Res.; 2008; 35, pp. 551-573. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2008.02.006]

56. Huang, S.; Hsu, C.H. Effects of travel motivation, past experience, perceived constraint, and attitude on revisit intention. J. Travel. Res.; 2009; 48, pp. 29-44. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0047287508328793]

57. Hui, T.K.; Wan, D.; Ho, A. Tourists’ satisfaction, recommendation and revisiting Singapore. Tour. Manag.; 2007; 28, pp. 965-975. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2006.08.008]

58. Assaker, G.; Vinzi, V.E.O. Examining the effect of novelty seeking, satisfaction, and destination image on tourists’ return pattern: A two factor, non-linear latent growth model. Tour. Manag.; 2011; 32, pp. 890-901. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2010.08.004]

59. Yoon, Y.; Uysal, M. An examination of the effects of motivation and satisfaction on destination loyalty: A structural model. Tour. Manag.; 2005; 26, pp. 45-56. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2003.08.016]

60. Grazioli, S.; Jarvenpaa, S.L. Perils of Internet fraud: An empirical investigation of deception and trust with experienced Internet consumers. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern.; 2000; 30, pp. 395-410. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/3468.852434]

61. Swan, J.E.; Bowers, M.R.; Richardson, L.D. Customer trust in the salesperson: An integrative review and meta-analysis of the empirical literature. J. Bus. Res.; 1999; 44, pp. 93-107. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(97)00244-0]

62. Herbst, K.C.; Finkel, E.J.; Allan, D.; Fitzsimons, G.M. On the dangers of pulling a fast one: Advertisement disclaimer speed, brand trust, and purchase intention. J. Consum. Res.; 2012; 38, pp. 909-919. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1086/660854]

63. Hilligoss, B.; Rieh, S.Y. Developing a unifying framework of credibility assessment: Construct, heuristics, and interaction in context. Info. Proc. Manag.; 2008; 44, pp. 1467-1484. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2007.10.001]

64. Abubakar, A.M.; Ilkan, M. Impact of online WOM on destination trust and intention to travel: A medical tourism perspective. J. Destin. Mark. Manag.; 2016; 5, pp. 192-201. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2015.12.005]

65. Huang, Z.; Zhang, C.; Hu, J. Destination brand personality and destination brand attachment–the involvement of self-congruence. J. Travel Tour. Mark.; 2017; 34, pp. 1198-1210. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2017.1330171]

66. Japutra, A.; Molinillo, S.; Ekinci, Y. Do stereotypes matter for brand attachment?. Mark. Intel. Plan.; 2021; 39, pp. 501-515. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MIP-08-2020-0339]

67. Wang, T.; Yeh, R.K.J.; Yen, D.C.; Sandoya, M.G. Antecedents of emotional attachment of social media users. Serv. Ind.; 2016; 36, pp. 438-451. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02642069.2016.1248419]

68. Yen, C.H.; Chen, C.Y.; Cheng, J.C.; Teng, H.Y. Brand attachment, tour leader attachment, and behavioral intentions of tourists. J. Hosp. Tour. Res.; 2018; 42, pp. 365-391. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1096348015584438]

69. Thomson, M.; MacInnis, D.J.; Whan Park, C. The ties that bind: Measuring the strength of consumers’ emotional attachments to brands. J. Consum. Psychol.; 2005; 15, pp. 77-91. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp1501_10]

70. Hwang, J.; Kandampully, J. The role of emotional aspects in younger consumer-brand relationships. J. Prod. Br. Manag.; 2012; 21, pp. 98-108. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10610421211215517]

71. Orth, U.R.; Limon, Y.; Rose, G. Store-evoked affect, personalities, and consumer emotional attachments to brands. J. Bus. Res.; 2010; 63, pp. 1202-1208. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.10.018]

72. Esch, F.R.; Langner, T.; Schmitt, B.H.; Geus, P. Are brands forever? How brand knowledge and relationships affect current and future purchases. J. Prod. Br. Manag.; 2006; 15, pp. 98-105. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10610420610658938]

73. Lin, T.; Ku, T. Effects of luxury brand perceptions on brand attachment and purchase intention: A comparative analysis among consumers in China, Hong Kong and Taiwan. SA J. Busi. Manag.; 2018; 49, pp. 1-9.

74. Kruger, M.; Saayman, M. Travel motivation of tourists to Kruger and Tsitsikamma national parks: A comparative study. Afr. J. Wildl. Res.; 2010; 40, pp. 93-102. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3957/056.040.0106]

75. Prentice, C.; Ji, C.; Li, K. The influence of gaming and non-gaming experience on customers’ response to the casino. J. Vac. Mark.; 2021; 28, pp. 1-14. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/13567667211066325]

76. Kangwon land homepage. Available online: https://www.high1.com/kangwonland/contents.do?key=75 (accessed on 27 August 2022).

77. Korea Tourism Knowledge & Information System. Korean tourism industry performance. Available online: https://know.tour.go.kr/stat/tourStatSearchDis19Re.do;jsessionid=00DF350349113BE56FCA1712DEEC8ACC (accessed on 27 August 2022).

78. Lee, T.H.; Chang, Y.S. The influence of experiential marketing and activity involvement on the loyalty intentions of wine tourists in Taiwan. Leis. Stud.; 2012; 31, pp. 103-121. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02614367.2011.568067]

79. Xu, W.; Youn, H.J.; Lee, C.K. Role of non-pharmaceutical interventions for COVID-19 in cruise tourists’ decision-making process: An extended model of goal-directed behavior. Sustainability; 2021; 13, 5552. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su13105552]

80. Embrain homepage. Available online: https://embrain.com (accessed on 26 September 2022).

81. International Business Machines Corporation (IBM). SPSS 25.0. USA. Available online: https://www.ibm.com (accessed on 5 September 2017).

82. Ringle, C.M.; Wende, S.; Becker, J.-M. SmartPLS 3.3.9. Germany, Available online: https://www.smartpls.com (accessed on 2 October 2022).

83. Hair, J.F.; Risher, J.J.; Sarstedt, M.; Ringle, C.M. When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. Eur. Bus. Rev.; 2019; 31, pp. 2-24. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203]

84. Voorhees, C.M.; Brady, M.K.; Calantone, R.; Ramirez, E. Discriminant validity testing in marketing: An analysis, causes for concern, and proposed remedies. J. Acad. Mark. Sci.; 2016; 44, pp. 119-134. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11747-015-0455-4]

85. Henseler, J.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. Testing measurement invariance of composites using partial least squares. Inter. Mark. Rev.; 2016; 33, pp. 405-431. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IMR-09-2014-0304]

86. Schlägel, C.; Sarstedt, M. Assessing the measurement invariance of the four-dimensional cultural intelligence scale across countries: A composite model approach. Eur. Manag. J.; 2016; 34, pp. 633-649. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2016.06.002]

87. Alan, A.K.; Kabadayı, E.T. Quality antecedents of brand trust and behavioral intention. Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sci.; 2014; 150, pp. 619-627. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.09.081]

88. Shamim, A.; Butt, M.M. A critical model of brand experience consequences. Asia Pac. J. Mark. Logis.; 2013; 25, pp. 102-117. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13555851311290957]

89. Dolbec, P.Y.; Chebat, J.C. The impact of a flagship vs. a brand store on brand attitude, brand attachment and brand equity. J. Retail.; 2013; 89, pp. 460-466. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2013.06.003]

90. Chu, R.K.; Choi, T. An importance-performance analysis of hotel selection factors in the Hong Kong hotel industry: A comparison of business and leisure travelers. Tour. Manag.; 2000; 21, pp. 363-377. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0261-5177(99)00070-9]

91. Hosmer, L.T. Trust: The connecting link between organizational theory and philosophical ethics. Acad. Manag. Rev.; 1995; 20, pp. 379-403. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/258851]

92. Lee, C.K.; Song, H.J.; Lee, H.M.; Lee, S.; Bernhard, B.J. The impact of CSR on casino employees’ organizational trust, job satisfaction, and customer orientation: An empirical examination of responsible gambling strategies. Int. J. Hosp. Manag.; 2013; 33, pp. 406-415. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2012.10.011]

93. Crifo, P.; Diaye, M.A.; Oueghlissi, R. The effect of countries’ ESG ratings on their sovereign borrowing costs. Q. Rev. Econo. Fin.; 2017; 66, pp. 13-20. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.qref.2017.04.011]

94. Ahn, J.; Lee, C.K.; Back, K.J.; Schmitt, A. Brand experiential value for creating integrated resort customers’ co-creation behavior. Int. J. Hosp. Manag.; 2019; 81, pp. 104-112. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.03.009]