Effect of Destination Image on Attendance at Team Sporting Events

Abstract

This study examines the relationship between destination image and attendance at professional hockey games. Thirteen destination image attributes were selected to measure the influence of destination image on the decision to attend road games of the Carolina Hurricanes. The study was conducted at the RBC Center in Raleigh, North Carolina, during a weekday home game and a weekend home game. Fans of differing levels of team identification were surveyed. The different levels of team identification ranged from season ticket holders to mini plan purchasers to game day purchasers. The results of the study indicated that destination image is a predictor of attendance at road games. Attributes, in particular, that were stronger influences on destination image included weather, cost, safety and hospitality. There were also no differences between weekday attendees and weekend attendees. However, fans who were season ticket holders or game day purchasers were influenced by destination image when deciding to travel to road games whereas mini plan purchasers were not.

An analysis of the image of destination Cross River and effect on visitors future intentions

“…Destination is a mental image formed by exposure to destination attributes (Bagoglu, 1999;Baloglu and McCleary, 1999;Gallarza et al, 2002). The importance of imagery cannot be overemphasized as tourists make their decisions based on these images and information before selecting a destination to visit (Mohan, 2010). An understanding of TDI is critical as it influences tourist preferences for destination, motivation for choice of destination, and by extension purchase behaviour.…”

“…Research on TDI started about four decades ago following the work of Hunt in 1971 (Mohan, 2010). Since then, extensive research has continued on the phenomenon (Echtner and Ritchie, 1991;Fakeye and Crompton, 1991).…”

“…All factor influencing image assessment made by individuals were incorporated and classified into distinct dimensions. Mohan (2010) observed that Pikes (2002) had reviewed 142 papers destination image papers published from 1973 to 2000 and concluded that there had been recurring criticism of the list of attributes. Mohan (2010) corroborated Pikes (2002) and asserts that there is no clearly conceptual base leading destination image studies, especially the ones investigating image and other concepts.…”

“…Mohan (2010) observed that Pikes (2002) had reviewed 142 papers destination image papers published from 1973 to 2000 and concluded that there had been recurring criticism of the list of attributes. Mohan (2010) corroborated Pikes (2002) and asserts that there is no clearly conceptual base leading destination image studies, especially the ones investigating image and other concepts. Fronchot and Kreziak (2008) similarly observed that there is still some problem with the conceptual development and measurement of tourism destination image and attractiveness.…”

“…What this means is that authors are not in agreement on what constitutes a generally acceptable measurement scales for measuring TDI. The lack of conceptual framework regarding the notion of tourism destination image (TDI) is still an area of concern to date in view of the fact that TDI is widely acclaimed to be a critical element in tourist visitation (Mohan, 2010;Fronchot and Kreziak, 2008). Unlike TDI, concepts in tourism research such as resident perception and attitude have standardized scale of measurement (Viviers and Slabbert, 2012;Delamere et al, 2001).…”