Assessment of image change over time: The case of Michigan

Abstract

Since destination image is accepted as an important element of destination management, destination management organizations (DMOs) commonly engage in destination image studies. The majority of published image studies have focused on measuring the image of a particular destination at a point in time. Destination image is prone to change but this aspect received little attention due to lack of studies measuring image change over time. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to assess the change in the image of a destination over a period of time using the same instrument on the same sampling destinations. A large scale and longitudinal market survey data gathered by the Michigan Regional Travel Market Survey were analyzed for the purposes of this study. The findings indicated that Michigan had an image change between 1996 and 2002 since the image of the most image dimensions recorded significant improvement in these markets. Potential reasons, managerial implications as well as limitations and future research suggestions are provided.

An Exploratory Study of Residents’ Perception of Place Image

“…In comparison with the three aforementioned dimensions (community services, physical appearance, and the intangible attributes of the social environment), entertainment opportunities appear to be the least concerning dimension among Kavala residents. This result contradicts previous place image findings (e.g., Chen and Tsai 2007 ; Tasci and Holecek 2007 ), which have consistently reported entertainment opportunities as a major dimension of place image and a key factor that influences tourists’ travel decision making ( Chen and Tsai 2007 ; Lin et al 2007 ). This current finding further reinforces the notion that tourists and residents do not share the same priorities in relation to all place image dimensions such as entertainment opportunities (see Alhemoud and Armstrong 1996 ; Sternquist-Witter 1985 ).…”

Exploring Destination Image Decay

“…Previous attempts to trace modifications to DI are informative. These studies have examined the role of an event in modifying a destination’s image (e.g., Gartner & Shen, 1992; Kim & Morrsion, 2005), how the travel experience induced change from pretrip image to posttrip image (e.g., Phelps, 1986; Yilmaz et al, 2009), whether DI differs among visitors and nonvisitors (e.g., Andreu, Bigné, & Cooper, 2001; Baloglu, 1998) and how modification to DI can be induced through advertising or other promotional activities (e.g., Perry, Izraeli, & Perry, 1976; Tasci & Holecek, 2007). Of particular note is Li and Vogelsong’s (2006) comparison of the same respondents during and after event participation.…”

Analysis of the projected image of tourism destinations on photographs: A literature review to prepare for the future

“…Additionally, the research on these specific topics will make possible tourism crossing bridges to other disciplines (with hospitality when studying hotels’ locations, with heritage studies when analyzing cultural activities, or leisure studies when coping with sports activities. Achieving an intelligent alignment between the perceived image and the PIP allows improvement of the quality of the tourism experience (Govers and Go, 2004). Further understanding of the tourists’ behavior regarding their interpretation of the PIP (Baloglu and McCleary, 1999), and especially the emotions, is evoked by those pictures. Greater analysis of the empirical studies that evaluate the evolution and changes of the PIP over time reveals the trends (Li and Vogelsong, 2006; Tasci and Holecek, 2007). Analyzing the consistency of the projected image of a destination through textual and pictorial elements communicated by both public and private agents (Bandyopadhyay and Morais, 2005; Bandyopadhyay et al, 2008).…”

“…Greater analysis of the empirical studies that evaluate the evolution and changes of the PIP over time reveals the trends (Li and Vogelsong, 2006; Tasci and Holecek, 2007).…”