Scale adaption and development

Multi-item scales (rather than single-item scales) were employed to assess the latent variables of this study. Malhotra (2010:316) defines a multi-item scale as consisting of “multiple items, where an item is a single question or statement to be evaluated”. The Likert scale is an example of the multi-item scale.

There are three approaches to generating a multi-item scale – adopting items used in other questionnaires, adapting items used in other questionnaires, and developing new items (Saunders et al 2009:374). In the current research, both the adaptation and development approaches were applied. The scales of attitude, subjective norms, perceived control, and visit intention were adapted from previous studies, while the scales of travel motivation and travel constraints were developed following Churchill‟s (1979:64-73) recommended procedures for developing measures of marketing constructs. Both these approaches are discussed in greater detail below.

In the current context, attitude, subjective norms, perceived control, and visit intention were all operationalised as uni-dimensional, multi-item constructs. In particular, attitude towards visiting South Africa was measured using six items adapted from Han et al (2011:56). All these items shared an umbrella question stem: “I feel that visiting South Africa within the next five years would be…”. Subjective norms were measured using three items adapted from Hsu and Huang (2012:404). An example is: “Most people who are important to me think that I should visit South Africa within the next five years”. Perceived

41

control was measured using three items adapted from Hsu and Huang (2012:405). An example is: “Whether I visit South Africa within the next five years is entirely up to me”. Five items mainly adapted from Huang and Hsu (2009:38) and Lee et al (2012:86) were used to measure the intention to visit South Africa. An example is: “I would like to visit South Africa within the next five years”. The current research followed Jang and Feng‟s (2007:580-590) idea that tourists‟ intentions to (re)visit a destination may vary depending on time frames – short-term (within the next 12 months), mid-term (within the next three years), and long-term (within the next five years). Given that South Africa is a long-haul holiday destination for Chinese travellers, the present survey focused on the long-term intentions of Chinese tourists.

For the purpose of the current research, both travel motivation and travel constraints were operationalised as multi-dimensional, multi-item constructs. To develop measures for these two constructs, this study adopted the scale development process suggested by Churchill (1979:64-73). The eight steps involved in this process and the recommended techniques to accomplish each step are demonstrated in the first two columns of Table 2.5. Steps one through four can be executed with a set of data collected from the pilot sample dealing with the issues of content validity, dimensionality, and internal consistency. Steps five through eight can be executed with another set of data collected from the survey sample dealing with the concerns for reliability, criterion validity, and construct validity (Echtner & Ritchie 1993:5). In practice, researchers may use these steps with some flexibility and the recommended techniques could be replaced with other similar techniques (Hung & Petrick 2010:213). The present study used all eight steps in developing the measures of travel motivation and travel constraints. The corresponding techniques used in this study are shown in the third column of Table 2.5. The remainder of this section elaborates on the generation of potential items (i.e. Step two).

42

TABLE 2.5: PROCEDURE FOR DEVELOPING MEASURES STEPS SUGGESTED BY CHURCHILL (1979) TECHNIQUES RECOMMENDED BY CHURCHILL (1979)

TECHNIQUES USED IN THE CURRENT RESEARCH 1. Specify domain of

construct  Literature search  Literature search

2. Generate sample of items  Literature search  Experience survey  Insight-stimulating examples  Critical incidents  Focus groups  Literature search  Semi-structured interviews  Panel of experts

3. Collect data  Small-scale data collection  Pilot survey (n=120) 4. Purify measure  Cronbach‟s alpha

 Exploratory factor analysis

 Cronbach‟s alpha

 Exploratory factor analysis 5. Collect data  Large-scale data collection  Formal survey (n=630)

6. Assess reliability  Cronbach‟s alpha  Split-half reliability

 Cronbach‟s alpha  Composite reliability  Split-half reliability 7. Assess validity  Multitrait-multimethod matrix

 Criterion validity

 Content validity  Construct validity

8. Develop norms

 Average and other statistics summarising distribution of scores

 Means

 Standard deviations

Source: Adapted from Churchill (1979:66); Hung & Petrick (2010:213)

Having specified the domain of travel motivation and travel constraints (see Chapter 5), an item pool was generated to measure these constructs. Echtner and Ritchie (1993:6) advise that employing multiple techniques is more likely to produce a complete list of measurement items. Therefore, three techniques were adopted in this context: a literature search, semi-structured interviews, and using a panel of experts. These techniques are subsequently discussed.

Firstly, an initial pool of 105 motive items and 36 constraint items was generated from an extensive search of both academic literature (see Table 2.6 for a list of the literature) and non-academic literature (e.g. promotional and advertising materials, guidebooks, and newspaper reports). Truong and

43

Foster (2006:844) maintain that non-academic literature is an effective source for identifying a suite of attributes associated with a specific travel destination.

TABLE 2.6: ACADEMIC LITERATURE USED TO GENERATE THE INITIAL ITEM POOL

TRAVEL MOTIVATION TRAVEL CONSTRAINTS

1. Li, Meng, Uysal & Mihalik (2013) 1. Lai, Li & Harrill (2013) 2. Hsu & Huang (2012) 2. Chen & Gassner (2012) 3. Li & Cai (2012) 3. Dong & Chick (2012)

4. Zhang, Ma & Qu (2012) 4. Zhang, Zhang, Cheng, Lu & Shi (2012) 5. Hua & Yoo (2011) 5. Li, Zhang, Mao & Deng (2011)

6. Li, Wen & Leung (2011) 6. Liang & Walker (2011)

7. Lu (2011) 7. Huang & Hsu (2009)

8. Yun & Joppe (2011) 8. Sparks & Pan (2009) 9. Hsu, Cai & Li (2010) 9. Zhang (2009)

10. Huang & Hsu (2009) 10. Johanson (2007)

11. Ma (2009) 11. Huang & Hsu (2005)

12. Chow & Murphy (2007) 12. Hsu & Lam (2003)

13. Johanson (2007) 13. Zhou, King & Turner (1998)

14. Mohsin (2007) -

15. Huang & Hsu (2005) -

16. Kau & Lim (2005) -

17. Kim, Guo & Agrusa (2005) -

18. Hsu & Lam (2003) -

19. Ryan & Mo (2001) -

20. Yu & Weiler (2001) - 21. Zhang & Lam (1999) - Source: Own construction

Secondly, the researcher purposively selected and interviewed 48 Chinese individuals using both closed and open questions. The interviewees included individuals who had visited South Africa (n=28) and those who had not (n=20). The interviewees were first asked to rate the items derived from the literature search on a three-point Likert-type scale, with 1 being „unimportant‟, 2 being „moderately important‟, and 3 being „very important‟. Thereafter, the interviewees were encouraged to add additional items that were considered important from their perspectives.

44

Thirdly, the results of the interviews were presented to a panel of experts comprising two tour guides with extensive experience in guiding Chinese tour groups in South Africa, two faculty members with expertise in consumer research, and one linguistic specialist. The panel then evaluated all potential items for applicability, redundancy, and representativeness. Based on the panel‟s constructive comments, 24 motive items and 24 constraint items were retained and used for data collection and purification (i.e. Steps three and four), discussed in the next section. It is important to note that all the motive items shared an umbrella question stem: “If I were to visit South Africa within the next five years, I would like to …”, and all the constraint items shared an umbrella question stem: “I would not visit South Africa within the next five years because …”.