The theory of sustainability values and travel behavior
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This paper reports the results of research that examines the interrelationships between efficacy of sustainability values (SV) and pro-sustainable behaviors of potential tourists. A partially mediated model is postulated and tested to help explain additional error variance in predicting consumers’ destination choice decisions in tourism, hence voiding a critical research gap. Coined as the “environmentally intellectualist behavior,” a new mediator variable is tested to explain additional error variance in human-value models. Design/methodology/approach The study is based on data collected from two representative samples of potential tourists from the USA and Canada. Data analyses include exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses that were used to examine the underlying domain structures of SV, followed by a predictive model using structural equation modeling. Findings The study findings suggest that values are salient factors that underlie pro-sustainable tourism and travel behavior. Moreover, the results confirm the existence of a higher-order sustainability construct. The study contributes original insights to the field by demonstrating that there are direct and indirect positive relationships between SV, environmental behaviors and decisions of consumers who take a pro-sustainable stance when traveling. Originality/value By modeling values as antecedents to attitudes and testing interrelationships between SV and the mediator variables coined as the environmentally intellectual behavior, the authors developed and tested a predictive model to explain destination- and product choice decisions. The model tested herein advances the value theory in two fundamental ways: first, this study demonstrates that SV can be modeled as higher-order factors. Second, values are antecedents to attitude and other variables, therefore must be included in consumer behavior models. Finally, the culture or origin of tourists matters when examining the impact of values on tourists’ choice decisions. Political actions and environmental attitudes can be modeled as mediators to explain additional error variance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".