MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3116553060 · doi:10.23668/psycharchives.4430

Cross-Cultural Construct and Predicative Validity of the Social Return Scale

2020· article· en· W3116553060 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
B. Bynum Boley, Evan J. Jordan, Kyle Maurice Woosnam, Naho Maruyama, Xiao Xiao, Camila Rojas

Notice bibliographique

RevuePsychology Archives · 2020
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiquePsychosocial Factors Impacting Youth
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPredicative expressionScale (ratio)Construct (python library)Construct validityPsychologyComputer scienceGeographyPsychometricsLinguisticsDevelopmental psychologyCartographyPhilosophy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Background of the study: While travel has long been a conspicuous activity with symbolic aspects (Dimanche & Samdahl, 1994), social media has fundamentally changed how tourists symbolically convey travel images to their peers. How the vacation will be viewed by one’s peers on social media has firmly cemented itself into the tourist psyche and how they plan and travel. One scale recently developed to understand the anticipated social media attractiveness of different destinations is the Social Return Scale (SRS) (Boley et al., 2018). The SRS is designed to measure the anticipated positive social media feedback one will receive from posting pictures of a travel experience either at the destination level or at the individual business level. Anticipated “Social Return” has been shown to be a significant predictor of tourists’ intention to visit destinations such as Cuba, participate in ecotourism (Beall et al. In press), and stay at independent accommodations (Boley & Woosnam, 2020). Purpose of the study: While the SRS has been shown to be construct valid with the ability to significantly explain intent to visit destinations and tourism businesses, it has yet to be tested outside of a North American context. Therefore, the purpose of this abstract is to test the SRS’ cross-cultural construct and predictive validity across the United States of America’s top 5 international travel markets (Canada, Mexico, United Kingdom, Japan, & China). Methodology: The survey research company Qualtrics was used to acquire panels of frequent international travelers from each of the U.S.’ top five markets (n=1,653; Canada=316; China=320; Japan=320; Mexico=349; U.K.=348). The translations of SRS followed Mahltora et al.’s (1996) guidelines of using native speakers to ensure functional and conceptual equivalence of the items making up the SRS. The metric equivalence of the SRS was assessed using CFA. The predictive validity of the SRS was assessed within a theory of planned behavior framework including travelers’ attitudes towards the U.S. and their perceived behavior control of visiting the U.S. within the next year (starting in June, 2020) and a more long-term time-horizon of three years to account for the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: The SRS exhibited strong convergent validity across all five samples with factor loadings above 0.50 for each sample and Average Variance Extracted estimates above 50% for each sample. The SRS also had construct reliability estimates above the 0.70 threshold in each sample. The SRS also exhibited discriminant validity with AVE values exceeding squared correlation values for the constructs of “Attitudes toward the U.S.” and “Perceived Behavioral Control” of visiting the U.S. As for predictive validity, the SRS was a significant predictor of intention to visit the U.S. within the next year for the samples from Canada (β=0.38; p=.001), China (β=0.31; p=.001), Japan (β=0.20; p=.007), and the U.K. (β=0.52; p=.001). There was no significant relationship between the SRS and intention to visit the U.S. within the next year for the Mexican sample (β=0.11; p=.14). For the intentions to visit the U.S. within the next three years, those who indicated they would very likely travel within the next year to the U.S. were removed from the sample before performing the analysis. This reduced the sample from 1,653 to 1,274 (Canada=237; China=278; Japan=304; Mexico=196; U.K.=259). The SRS was found to have a diminished influence on influence on intent to visit the U.S. within the next three years. It was only a significant predictor for the sample from Canada (β=0.18; p=.007); China (β=0.25; p=.001), and Japan (β=0.14; p=.04) with the strength of the relationship slightly reduced across each sample. Conclusions: With the SRS only being previously applied with in North American English-speaking countries, the purpose of this research was to assess the construct and predictive validity of the scale within the top five U.S. travel markets. The psychometric properties of the scale appear to be reliable and valid across all five samples providing further credence to the validity of the scale. The scale was also a significant predictor of intent to visit the United States in four of the five samples demonstrating the scale’s importance as an antecedent to travel behavior. Research implications and limitations: More research needs to assess the cross-cultural validity of the SRS across a variety of languages before the scale can truly be embraced as having universal validity. Second, this data collection was during the COVID-19 Pandemic. It would be prudent to continue to test “Social Return’s” influence on intent to travel as the pandemic continues on as well as when it ends to see how the influence of “Social Return” waxes and wanes with changes in restrictions and perceived risk. References: Beall, J., Boley, B., Landon, A., & Woosnam, K.M. (Published Online) What drives ecotourism: environmental values or symbolic conspicuous consumption? Journal of Sustainable Tourism. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09669582.2020.1825458 Boley, B. B., Jordan, E. J., Kline, C., & Knollenberg, W. (2018). Social return and intent to travel. Tourism Management, 64, 119-128. Boley, B. B., & Woosnam, K. M. (2020). Going Global or Going Local? Why Travelers Choose Franchise and Independent Accommodations. Journal of Travel Research, 0047287520904786. Dimanche, F., & Samdahl, D. (1994). Leisure as symbolic consumption: A conceptualization and prospectus for future research. Leisure Sciences, 16(2), 119-129. Malhotra, N. K., Agarwal, J., & Peterson, M. (1996). Methodological issues in cross‐cultural marketing research. International marketing review. Munar, A. M., & Jacobsen, J. K. S. (2014). Motivations for sharing tourism experiences through social media. Tourism management, 43, 46-54.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,260
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,996

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,006
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,088
Tête enseignante GPT0,433
Écart entre enseignants0,345 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2020
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuePsychology ArchivesMême sujetPsychosocial Factors Impacting YouthTravaux en français237 207