This article was downloaded by: [HES-SO Haute Ecole Spécialisée de Suisse Occidentale]On: 01 June 2015, At: 02:37Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Click for updates

Journal of Travel & Tourism MarketingPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wttm20

Developing a Typology of Chinese Shopping Tourists: AnApplication of the Schwartz Model of Universal HumanValuesMi Ju Choi, Cindy Yoonjoung Heo & Rob LawPublished online: 06 May 2015.

To cite this article: Mi Ju Choi, Cindy Yoonjoung Heo & Rob Law (2015): Developing a Typology of Chinese ShoppingTourists: An Application of the Schwartz Model of Universal Human Values, Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, DOI:10.1080/10548408.2014.997961

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2014.997961

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon andshould be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable forany losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use ofthe Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

DEVELOPING A TYPOLOGY OF CHINESE SHOPPINGTOURISTS: AN APPLICATION OF THE SCHWARTZ

MODEL OF UNIVERSAL HUMAN VALUESMi Ju Choi

Cindy Yoonjoung HeoRob Law

ABSTRACT. This study aims to develop a typology of Chinese shopping tourists based on theSchwartz values. As a medium for investigating rich segmented markets, values emerge as an alternativevariable for personality, lifestyle, and other demographic and socioeconomic segmentation variables.Convenience sampling is adopted in this study, and 511 usable responses in China are obtained. Resultsof the factor analysis reveal the following five dimensions of personal values among Chinese shoppingtourists: self-enhancement, universalism, assurance, self-direction, and benevolence. The cluster analy-sis, which used the aforementioned five dimensions, identify the following clusters: uncertainty (Cluster1), passion (Cluster 2), balance (Cluster 3), and conservation (Cluster 4). This study provides insightsinto the nature of personal value of Chinese shopping tourists by applying the Schwartz values, andidentifies the shopping travel characteristics of Chinese shopping tourists. The results of this study areexpected to assist destination marketing organizations in creating strategies to provide better shoppingenvironments and services for tourists, and to achieve higher levels of tourist satisfaction.

KEYWORDS. Shopping tourism, shopping tourist, tourist typology, Schwartz values

INTRODUCTION

Shopping has become a major activity amongtourists and accounts for a considerable portion oftheir expenditure (Rabbiosi, 2011; Tomori, 2010).Tourism activities have previously been limited tovisiting beautiful, exotic tourist attractions andenjoying comfortable accommodation. However,

in recent years, tourism activities have beenexpanded to include entertainment, recollection(of travel experiences), obtaining knowledgeabout shopping places, and buying souvenirs/gifts(Meng, Xu, & Fowler, 2012; Park, Reisinger, &Noh, 2010). Recent studies demonstrate the rela-tive importance of shopping during travels. Wongand Wan (2013) considered shopping in foreign

Mi Ju Choi is a PhD Student, School of Hospitality and Tourism Management, The Hong KongPolytechnic University, TH842, 17 Science Museum Road, TST East, Kowloon, Hong Kong (E‑mail:mj.choi@connect.polyu.hk).

Cindy Yoonjoung Heo is Assistant Professor, School of Hospitality and Tourism Management, The HongKong Polytechnic University, TH815, 17 Science Museum Road, TST East, Kowloon, Hong Kong (E‑mail:cindy.heo@polyu.edu.hk).

Rob Law is Professor, School of Hospitality and Tourism Management, The Hong Kong PolytechnicUniversity, TH829, 17 Science Museum Road, TST East, Kowloon, Hong Kong (E‑mail:rob.law@polyu.edu.hk).

Address correspondence to: Mi Ju Choi, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University/ TH842, 17 ScienceMuseum Road, TST East, Kowloon, Hong Kong.

Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 2015© 2015 Taylor & FrancisISSN: 1054-8408 print / 1540-7306 onlineDOI: 10.1080/10548408.2014.997961

1

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

HE

S-SO

Hau

te E

cole

Spé

cial

isée

de

Suis

se O

ccid

enta

le]

at 0

2:37

01

June

201

5

environments and consuming purchased productsin residential environments as a natural psycholo-gical phenomenon among tourists both during andafter their travels. Heung and Qu (1998) regardedshopping as among the oldest and most importanttourist activities and claimed that the failure oftourists to shop would lead to an unfulfilling travel.Paige and Littrell (2003) also identified shoppingas one of the most preferred activities among tour-ists and found that retail industries continuouslydevelop new products to encourage further expen-diture by tourists. Shopping is therefore not anancillary part of tourist activities and has been re-evaluated as equally crucial as accommodation,meals, sightseeing, and other basic elements (Liu& Wang, 2010; Rabbiosi, 2011; Saayman &Saayman, 2012; Tomori, 2010; Tosun, Temizkan,Timothy, & Fyall, 2007). Shopping tourism hasbecome a fresh, rapidly growing form of tourismwith shopping as its main objective.

Economic promotion is one of the most impor-tant roles and functions of shopping tourism. TheHong Kong Tourism Board (2013) found thattourists allocate a significant portion of spendingto shopping, as demonstrated by their 59.3% and59.5% allocations for shopping in 2012 and 2013respectively. Visitors to Macau spent 49%, visitorsto Korea allotted 43%, whereas visitors to Japandedicated 32% of their travel budget to shoppingpurchases (Wong & Wan, 2013). However, theeffects of shoppingmay not be limited to economicgains for local, regional, and national economies.The authentic products and souvenirs purchased bytourists for different reasons help a destinationdevelop a favorable image in the mind of touristsand their friends and relatives because people,particularly tourists, tend to share their experiencesthrough photos, videos, and the items they pur-chased (Wong, 2013; Wong & Wan, 2013). Thus,in addition to using tourism as an alternative eco-nomic growth strategy, developing various compo-nents of the industry (e.g. shopping) may be usedas a political tool to promote an auspicious imageon the international stage (Tomori, 2010; Tosun,2001; Tosun & Fyall, 2005).

The comprehensive effects of shopping tourismon marketing, operations, human resources,research and development, economy, and financehave recently attracted growing academic interest(Rabbiosi, 2011; Saayman & Saayman, 2012;

Tomori, 2010). Researchers have primarilyfocused on shopping satisfaction (Barutcu,Dogan, & Unguren, 2011; Liu, Choi, & Lee,2008; Tosun et al., 2007; Wong & Law, 2003;Wong & Wan, 2013), behavior (Fairhurst,Costello, & Holmes, 2007; Kemperman,Borgers, & Timmermans, 2009; Xu &McGehee, 2012), and incentives in terms of mar-keting. The responses of tourists to shoppingfacilities, such as shopping malls, departmentstores, and duty-free shops, and the methodsemployed by these facilities to attract tourists,have also been investigated (Doong, Wang, &Law, 2012; Way & Robertson, 2013). However,none of the extant shopping tourism studies haveexamined the subgroups of shopping tourists.Previous studies generally viewed shopping tour-ists as a single group. Thus, tourist shopping-related marketing activities are limited and donot efficiently engage tourists to maximize theirshopping expenditure. Shopping tourists can beclassified into several types. While some touristsvisit other countries or regions with shopping astheir main purpose, other tourists have varyingpreferences and may mainly shop for luxurygoods, practical products, or precious local pro-ducts. Therefore, the shopping patterns and cate-gories of shopping tourists must be investigated.

Chernenko and Sunderam (2011) explainedthat an optimized marketing mix and resourcedistribution decisions on market categorizationcan be formed only by assuming that customersare not homogeneous. Therefore, marketersmust be able to differentiate identical productssold in different markets. Designing effectivemarketing strategies requires accurate categori-zation and understanding of marketing targets.The categorization of shopping tourists mayenable marketers to establish appropriate mar-keting strategies for shopping festivals.Typology provides the evaluation criteria andessential data for various marketing activities(Menzly & Ozbas, 2010). Although many hos-pitality and tourism studies have explored tour-ist typology, only a few of them haveinvestigated tourists with special interests, suchas medical, cultural, and golf tourists.Moreover, most of the previous attempts tocategorize tourists have been based only ontheir motivations and demographic

2 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

HE

S-SO

Hau

te E

cole

Spé

cial

isée

de

Suis

se O

ccid

enta

le]

at 0

2:37

01

June

201

5

characteristics, thereby presenting an importantresearch gap for this study to endeavor to fill.

This study aims to categorize Chinese shop-ping tourists based on the Schwartz values. As amedium for investigating rich segmented mar-kets, values emerge as an alternative variablefor personality, lifestyle, and other demographicand socioeconomic segmentation variables(Rokeach, 1973). Values are basic orientationspresumed to underlie and influence individualvariation on many of the constructs. Moreover,values can provide predictive and explanatorypower in the analysis of attitudes, opinions, andactions (Gholipour, Tajaddini, & Al-mulali,2014; Mai & Olsen, 2013). Accordingly, valuescan reflect major social change in societies andacross nations (Gholipour et al., 2014).Therefore, tourists may purchase varied or iden-tical products according to their respectivevalue structures. In particular, the Schwartzvalues are currently the most widely usedmethod for studying individual differences invalues by social and cross-cultural psycholo-gists (Brunsø, Scholderer, & Grunert, 2004;Chung & Heung, 2007; Doran, 2009; Hede,Jago, & Deery, 2004). The conception ofSchwartz values that guided their developmentwas derived directly from the six features ofvalues outlined above (Chung & Heung, 2007;Doran, 2009). This scale required respondentsto rate the importance of 56 specific values as“guiding principles in your life”. These specificvalues measure 10 theory-based value orienta-tions (Chung & Heung, 2007; Doran, 2009).

The specific objectives of this study are asfollows: (1) to investigate the underlyingdimensions of Schwartz values for Chineseshopping tourists; (2) to categorize Chineseshopping tourists according to Schwartz values;(3) to explore differences between tourist seg-ments with respect to sociodemographic char-acteristics and shopping behavior. This studymakes a unique contribution to the extantbody of shopping tourism research. Despitethe abundance of studies on tourist shoppingand shopping tourism (Michalkó & Ratz,2006; Tosun et al., 2007), no previous studyhas clearly targeted shopping tourists. The cur-rent study accurately identified shopping tour-ists, who travel for the primary purpose of

shopping, by employing a rigorous screeningmethod. This study also provides insights intothe nature of personal values of Chinese shop-ping tourists by applying the Schwartz values,and identifies the shopping travel characteristicsof Chinese shopping tourists. The results of thisstudy are expected to assist destination market-ing organizations in creating strategies to pro-vide better shopping environments and servicesfor tourists, and to achieve higher levels oftourist satisfaction.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Shopping Tourism

Shopping tourism is distinguished from otherforms of tourism by the varying patterns inancillary activities of pure shopping tourismand multipurpose tourism. Timothy and Butler(1995) claimed that the shopping needs anddesires of tourists motivate them to visit specificregions or countries. Based on this assumption,Timothy (2005) defined shopping tourism as anarea of tourism with shopping as its main pur-pose, for which tourists travel to other places fornon-profit purposes. This definition was lateradopted by many other tourism scholars (Liu& Wang, 2010; Michalko & Ratz, 2006;Rabbiosi, 2011; Saayman & Saayman, 2012;Tomori, 2010; Tosun et al., 2007). Accordingto Wong (2013), shopping tourism includes allancillary activities of tourists, such as diningout, watching shows, enjoying attractions, andpurchasing products at tourist destinations, andis no longer restricted to travel with shopping asa primary goal. Shopping tourism is thereforea natural economic activity that is shaped bythe purchasing behavior of tourists when theyare attracted into buying products at touristdestinations. Although shopping tourism hasbeen defined from various perspectives, all ofthese definitions emphasize the importance ofshopping.

Many shopping tourism studies have focusedon the motivations of, and the values perceivedby, shopping tourists. Several studies haveinvestigated the effect of environmental aware-ness on the emotion, perception, and behavior

Choi, Heo, and Law 3

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

HE

S-SO

Hau

te E

cole

Spé

cial

isée

de

Suis

se O

ccid

enta

le]

at 0

2:37

01

June

201

5

of shopping tourists. For example, Snepenger,Murphy, O’Connell, and Gregg (2003) identi-fied the differences between shopping touristsand non-shopping tourists in terms of their char-acteristics and behaviors. The findings showedthat shopping tourists participated more activelyin shopping and tourist activities than non-shop-ping tourists. A statistical difference in terms of‘“visiting art gallery’” was found between thetwo groups (shopping tourists and non-shop-ping tourists). Shopping tourists were found tobe more willing to visit art galleries than non-shopping tourists. Tosun et al. (2007) identifiednobility, relationship, novelty, functionality, andappearance as the five shopping motivations oftourists in the United States (US), and deter-mined the recollection of travel experiences,utilization of resources, and purchasing of giftsas the primary reasons behind their travels, andfound that shopping tourism motives are differ-ent from general shopping motives, taking intoaccount that traveling and shopping occursimultaneously in shopping tourism. Tosunet al. (2007) verified the differences in the shop-ping motives of tourists based on their cogni-tive, behavioral, and sociopsychologicalcharacteristics and found that tourists whofocus on hedonic shopping values have higherscores in terms of sociality and form factorsthan those who focus on practical shoppingvalues. However, the target of that study wasnot shopping tourists but leisure tourists. Theirmain shopping products were authentic souve-nirs from Turkey. Accordingly, hedonic shop-ping values were shown to have higher scoresthan utilitarian values because of the character-istics of the souvenirs.

Yu and Littrell (2005) analyzed how thehedonic values of shopping tourists affect theirshopping behavior and addressed the limitationsof previous studies in identifying overall touristbehavior while focusing on the practical andfunctional aspects of shopping tourism. Fourkey findings emerged from this investigation.First, although tourists considered functionalelements as more important than hedonic ele-ments, hedonic elements had a greater effect ontheir shopping satisfaction than functional ele-ments. Second, the involvement of tourists inshopping tourism increases as their regard to the

importance of their hedonic shopping valuesalso increases, demonstrating the definitive rela-tionship between hedonic shopping values andtourist shopping involvement. Third, touristswith a higher tendency to buy impulsivelyretain important hedonic shopping values morethan other tourists. Lastly, tourists with largelyimportant hedonic shopping values place con-siderable importance on specific elements, suchas adventure, novelty, and the pursuit of changein daily routines. Yu and Littrell (2005) specifi-cally investigated how shopping values (hedo-nic and utilitarian values) affected tourists’shopping behavior in terms of handicraft sou-venirs. Similar to Tosun et al.’s (2007) research,the current study’s findings showed that hedonicvalue tended to have a stronger impact on tour-ist shopping behavior than utilitarian valuebecause of its nature characteristics.

Yüksel (2007) was among the leadingresearchers who identified the consumptionbehaviors of shopping tourists. By incorporat-ing the concept of tourist shopping value intothe models of Mehrabian and Russell (1974),Yüksel (2007) verified the effect of environ-mental awareness on pleasure and stimulation,the effect of pleasure and stimulation on theutilitarian and hedonic values perceived byshopping tourists, and the effect of these valueson approaching behavior. All of these effects,excluding that of utilitarian value on approach-ing behavior, were confirmed by analyzing thebehaviors of shopping tourists at a shopping sitein south-west Turkey. The results demonstratedthat in relation to shopping sites, environmentalawareness plays an important role in the forma-tion of perception, emotions, and behavior ofshopping tourists. Accordingly, shopping tour-ists may exhibit positive consumption behaviorswhen they are situated in an optimum shoppingenvironment.

Extant studies on shopping tourists have pri-marily focused on shopping motives, one-dimensional aspects of perceived values, andaspects of utilitarian values. By contrast,Yüksel (2007) further investigated the con-sumption behaviors of shopping tourists byfocusing on their emotions, awareness, andbehaviors. Kinley, Josiam, and Kim (2003)examined the shopping motives of tourists in

4 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

HE

S-SO

Hau

te E

cole

Spé

cial

isée

de

Suis

se O

ccid

enta

le]

at 0

2:37

01

June

201

5

shopping centers based on the push-and-pullmotivation concept and used 22 motivationvariables to categorize the tourists into threegroups, namely, shopping, experiential, and pas-sive tourists. The motivations of these groupswere found to be significantly related to theirshopping behaviors, including their visiting pat-terns to unique stores within the region, shop-ping behaviors at different stores, and theirpreferences to purchase special and bargainsale products. Experiential tourists primarilyfocus on enjoying their vacation, shopping atdifferent stores, and engaging in social activitieswith their friends and families. Passive touristsprimarily focus on visiting unique stores withinthe region, purchasing special and bargain saleproducts, and shopping at different stores.Lastly, shopping tourists primarily focus onthe pull factors that reflect the local culture,including unique architecture, products, andambience that significantly predict their overallsatisfaction and intention to revisit.Accordingly, the categorization of shopping pat-terns must be based on the type of tourist ratherthan on tourists in general, which can serve asthe basis for future studies on the motives,satisfaction level, and perceived values of shop-ping tourists, as well as on the significant differ-ences between the various types of shoppingtourists.

Tourist Typologies

Typology provides the evaluation criteria andessential data for various marketing activities(Menzly & Ozbas, 2010). Although many hos-pitality and tourism studies have explored tour-ist typology, only a few of them haveinvestigated tourists with special interests, suchas medical, cultural, and golf tourists.Moreover, most of the previous attempts tocategorize tourists have only been based ontheir motivations and demographic characteris-tics, thereby presenting an important researchgap for this study to endeavour to fill. Table 1presents a summary of the previous studies ontourist typologies in the hospitality and tourismindustry. Among these empirical studies arethose that classified tourists into different

groups. Despite the seeming similarity of touristtypologies methods adopted by most studies,these methods generate different tourist typolo-gies. For example, the tourist types (i.e. fuzzy,escape, recreational, relax, and active) adoptedby Andreu, Kozak, Avci, and Cifter (2005) weresimilar to those of Cochrane (2006) (i.e. elite,backpacker, special interest, mass, backpackerplus, and explorer).

Although many tourism and hospitality stu-dies have investigated the typology of touristsin general, the typology of shopping tourists hasbeen largely ignored. Shopping tourists must beclassified given the increasing importance ofshopping tourism. Moreover, previous studiesmostly used travel motivation to segment tour-ists (Andreu et al., 2005; Chang, 2006;Cochrane, 2006; Dolnicar & Leisch, 2003;Ignatov & Smith, 2006; Kim & Ritchie, 2012;Lee, Lee, Bernhard, & Yoon, 2006; McKercher,2002; Park & Yoon, 2009; Wongkit &McKercher, 2013). Travel motivation, whichserves as a major determinant of travel, hasbecome an important segmentation variable(Crompton, 1979; Iso-Ahola, 1982). Accordingto Fodness (1994), travel motivation is the driv-ing force behind all tourist behaviors and playsa critical role in the classification of tourists.However, despite the importance of travel moti-vation, this present study classifies shoppingtourists based on the universal human valuesof Schwartz. Highly suitable segmentation vari-ables for shopping tourists must be establishedbecause these tourists share the common moti-vation to shop. Human values serve as the guid-ing principles for the selection and appreciationof behaviors, persons, and thoughts (Rohan,2000; Rokeach, 1973). Therefore, shoppingtourists are expected to exhibit different shop-ping patterns, and their shopping expendituresare based on their embedded values.Accordingly, this study categorizes shoppingtourists based on their human values, particu-larly the Schwartz values.

Chinese Shopping Tourists

Shopping tourism is expected to maintain itstop position in the future, as the number of

Choi, Heo, and Law 5

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

HE

S-SO

Hau

te E

cole

Spé

cial

isée

de

Suis

se O

ccid

enta

le]

at 0

2:37

01

June

201

5

TABLE

1.Sum

maryof

Previou

sStudies

onTou

ristTyp

olog

iesin

theHos

pitalityan

dTou

rism

Indu

stry

Autho

r(s)

Targe

tClass

ifica

tion

Seg

men

tatio

nva

riables

Won

gkit&McK

erch

er(201

3)Med

ical

tourists

Ded

icated

med

ical

tourist

Holiday

ingmed

ical

touristOpp

ortunistic

med

ical

tourist

Trave

lmotivation

Hes

itant

med

ical

tourist

Kim

&Ritchie(201

2)Golftourists

Golf-intens

ivego

lfers

Com

panion

golfe

rsTrave

lmotivation

Multi-motivated

golfe

rsPark&Yoo

n(200

9)Rural

tourists

Fam

ilytoge

therne

ssWan

t-it-all

Trave

lmotivation

Pas

sive

tourists

Learning

andex

citemen

tMolera&Albalad

ejo(200

7)Rural

tourists

Fam

ilyruraltou

rists

Rural

lifetourists

The

bene

fits

tourists

seek

Relax

ruraltou

rists

Tou

rists

ofrurala

ccom

mod

ation

Meh

metog

lu(200

7)Nature-ba

sed

tourists

Culture

andplea

sure

activity-orie

nted

Low-activity

oriented

Trave

lactivity

Natureac

tivity

oriented

Cha

ng(200

6)Tou

rists

Abo

riginal

cultu

rallea

rners

Activecu

lture

explorers

Trave

lmotivation

Cha

ngeroutinetrav

elers

Coc

hran

e(200

6)Tou

rists

Elite

Bac

kpac

ker

Trave

lmotivation

Spe

cial

interest

Mas

sExp

lorer

Bac

kpac

kerplus

Leeet

al.(200

6)Cas

inovisitors

Cha

lleng

ean

dwinning

seek

ers

Ligh

tga

mblingse

ekers

Trave

lmotivation

Onlywinning

seek

ers

Multi-pu

rpos

ese

ekers

Igna

tov&Smith

(200

6)Culinarytourists

Foo

dtourists

Foo

dan

dwinetourists

Trave

lmotivation

Winetourists

Trave

lactivity

Froch

ot(200

5)Tou

rists

Actives

Gaz

ers

Soc

ioec

onom

icch

arac

teris

tics

Relax

ers

Rurals

And

reuet

al.(200

5)Tou

rists

Fuz

zyEscap

eTrave

lmotivation

Rec

reationa

lRelax

Active

Dolnica

r&Le

isch

(200

3)Wintertourists

Skier

Culture

tourists

Sno

wbo

arding

andnigh

tlife

Trave

lmotivation

Hea

lthtourists

Sup

erac

tives

Bec

ken,

Sim

mon

s,&Frampton

(200

3)Tou

rists

Cam

per

Coa

chtourist

Trave

lpattern

Bac

kpac

ker

Trampe

r(hiker)

Visitfriend

san

drelatives

(VFR)

Soft-co

mforttrav

eler

Autotourist

Wicke

ns(200

2)Tou

rists

Culturalh

erita

getype

Heliolatrou

stype

Trave

lmotivation

Rav

ertype

Lord

Byron

type

Shirle

yValen

tinetype

McK

erch

er(200

2)Culturaltou

rists

Purpo

sefulc

ulturaltou

rists

Sightse

eing

cultu

raltou

rists

Incide

ntal

cultu

raltou

rists

Seren

dipitous

cultu

raltou

rists

Trave

lmotivation

Dep

thof

expe

rienc

eCas

ualc

ulturaltou

rists

6 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

HE

S-SO

Hau

te E

cole

Spé

cial

isée

de

Suis

se O

ccid

enta

le]

at 0

2:37

01

June

201

5

overseas trips made by Chinese tourists isexpected to continue to grow from 83 millionto 130 million in 2015, and 200 million by 2020(The United NationsWorld Tourism Organization[UNWTO], 2014). Accordingly, Chinese touristshave become big spenders. Market research indi-cates that shopping far surpasses sightseeing asthe most preferred activity. The UNWTO report(2014) indicates that Chinese tourists overtookAmerican tourists, becoming the world’s topspenders in 2013. Chinese tourists spent US$129 billion, up 26% from 2012. Based onChina’s total population of 1.3 billion, thisworks out at about US$ 78 per head and suggeststhat we are seeing only the beginning of the effectof this potential spending power. Given theincreasing number of Chinese shopping tourists,identifying the nature of Chinese shopping tour-ists is thus necessary.

Schwartz Values

Values are unique products that guide and deter-mine the lifestyles of each individual (Rokeach,1973). These products are conceptions of the desir-able, which affect the decisions of individuals andgroups (Kluckhohn, 1951). By serving as the foun-dations of a philosophy of life (Kluckhohn &Strodbeck, 1961), values suggest the appropriate

action for an individual constrained by limitedcapacity and time, as well as guide the lives ofpeople living in complex and uncertain socie-ties. Values also reflect the things that areimportant in the lives of each individual(Feather, 1990; Schwartz & Bilsky,1987, 1990), and they differ from knowledgestructure (Mervis & Rosch, 1981) and attitude(Maio & Olson, 1994; Rohan, 2000; Rokeach,1973). Values transcend situations and arealigned in a hierarchical order based on theirimportance (Bardi & Schwartz, 2003).Furthermore, values share unified structuresamong similar component conceptions(Schwartz, 1992). As goals of the desirablethat are applicable to both time and context,values may be considered to be motivationalcomponent conceptions. The values pursuedby individuals also serve as their principles inlife and are directly related to the motivationsbehind their actions (Kluckhohn, 1951;Rokeach, 1973; Schwartz, 1992). Therefore,the various actions of individuals can be under-stood, explained, and predicted by analyzingthe values of these individuals.

Figure 1 and Table 2 show the structure ofSchwartz’s value survey and its description.Schwartz (1992) categorized the distinguishedvalues into 10 types. These types represent

FIGURE 1. The Structure of the Schwartz Values Survey

Note. From Schwartz (1992).

Choi, Heo, and Law 7

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

HE

S-SO

Hau

te E

cole

Spé

cial

isée

de

Suis

se O

ccid

enta

le]

at 0

2:37

01

June

201

5

different motivational contents and are relatedto different abstract objectives. For example,benevolence values are related to the abstractobjectives and motivations of individuals toimprove the welfare of their peers, whilepower values are related to the abstract objec-tives and motivations of individuals to dominateother people. Values guide the evaluation ofevents that are related to abstract objectives(Feather, 1990; Rohan, 2000).

These basic values share a dynamic relationalstructure that creates a quasi-circumflex struc-ture in which each type of value may be com-patible, contradictory, or unrelated to oneanother. For example, these values can bedivided into openness to change or conservationbased on the tendency of these values tobecome favorable and dynamic or to preserveand maintain established realities respectively.Values related to openness to change includestimulation and self-direction values, whereasconservation includes tradition, conformity,

and security values. Self-enhancement valuesrefer to the pursuit of authority and accomplish-ment, whereas self-transcendence values prior-itize the welfare and happiness of the entirehumanity before the welfare of an individual.Self-enhancement values include power,achievement, and hedonism values, whereasself-transcendence values include universalismand benevolence values (Norman, Sorrentino,Windell, & Manchanda, 2008). Power,achievement, stimulation, hedonism, and self-direction values emphasize the pursuit of per-sonal interests whereas benevolence, tradition,and conformity values prioritize the welfareand interests of others. Universalism andsecurity values concern both individual andgroup interests, whereas spirituality values arecategorized separately.

Hede et al. (2004) used Schwartz values tocategorize the attendees of special events intodrifters, hedonists, playful achievers, temperatenetworkers, and dynamos. These categories

TABLE 2. Description of Schwartz Values

Tendency Type Description

Self-transcendence ~Conservation

Benevolence Benevolence values, such as helpfulness, honesty, forgiveness, loyalty, andresponsibility, concern the improvement and the protection of the welfare ofclose peers.

Tradition Tradition values, such as modesty and emphasis on tradition and moderation,are related to the respect and commitment of an individual to his/her culture,religion, and tradition.

Conformity Conformity values, such as obedience, agreement, self-discipline, andsubordination to elders, refer to the restraining of actions and inclinations thatcan harm others and violate social expectations or norms.

Conservation ~Self-enhancement

Security Security values, such as family safety, national security, social order,cleanliness, and mutual reciprocity, are related to the establishment of socialrelationships and securing the safety of an individual.

Power Power values, such as social authority, prestige, and wealth, control socialstatus, privilege, and human resources.

Self-enhancement~Open To Change

Achievement Achievement values, such as success, competence, ambition, and influence,primarily concern individual accomplishment according to social standards.

Hedonism Hedonism values, such as pleasure and enjoying life, are related to thesensuous gratification experienced by an individual after achieving his/herdesires.

Stimulation Stimulation values, such as varied and exciting lives, refer to the excitement,novelty, and challenges that an individual encounters throughout his/her life.

Open to Change ~Self-transcendence

Self-direction

Self-direction values, such as creativity, freedom, independence, curiosity, andchoosing of own goals, refer to the independence of an individual to decideon his/her actions and choices based on his/her creativity and exploration.

Universalism Universalism values, such as open-mindedness, wisdom, social justice, worldpeace, perception of a beautiful world, harmony with nature, andenvironmental protection, refer to the obligation of an individual tounderstand, evaluate, and protect the welfare of all people and nature.

8 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

HE

S-SO

Hau

te E

cole

Spé

cial

isée

de

Suis

se O

ccid

enta

le]

at 0

2:37

01

June

201

5

helped in understanding how these participantsbehave and satisfy themselves based on theirindividual values. Brunsø et al. (2004) alsoused Schwartz values in their survey to investi-gate the relationship between human values andfood-related lifestyles and found that theachievement values of the surveyed individualsfrom Spain and Germany did not affect theirfood-related lifestyles. They statistically demon-strated that human values can influence the dietsof people. Similarly, Chung and Heung (2007)studied how food quality, service quality, con-formity, universalism, reputation, likelihood ofreturn, and overall meal satisfaction affect thetipping behavior of restaurant customers. Theyfound that all independent variables, except foruniversalism, were statistically significant at the1% level. Doran (2009) conducted a surveyamong 329 people in the US to investigate therelationship between the 10 Schwartz valuesand the decision of individuals to purchase pro-ducts from trade fairs. Seven of these values,namely universalism, conformity, security,power, achievement, hedonism, and self-direc-tion values, were statistically significant at the1% level. In Doran’s (2009) study, universalismvalues were identified as the most importantvalues for trade fair consumers. These abovementioned findings prove the wide use of theSchwartz value theory in tourism studies tomeasure human values. This study also aimsto categorize shopping tourists based on thesame principle.

METHODOLOGY

A three-part survey instrument was devel-oped for this study. The first section comprisedquestions about basic human values. Theresponses to the questions were measuredusing the Short Schwartz Values Survey(SSVS) scale developed by Schwartz (2003).The SSVS scale represents the 10 Schwartzvalues that encompass the 21 questions in thefirst part of the survey. Table 3 shows the SSVSscale questions. The respondents were asked toindicate their level of agreement with each itemusing a 7-point Likert-type scale (1 for“strongly disagree”, 7 for “strongly agree”).

The second section of the survey focused onthe shopping behavior of the respondents, parti-cularly on their purchasing behaviors, shoppingfrequency, shopping expenditures, accompany-ing parties, length of stay, and travel modes.The last section gathered the demographicinformation of the respondents, such as theirgender, age, highest educational attainment,residence status, and household income.

The target population of shopping touristsmust be determined before a typology can bedeveloped. As described in existing studies, themost widely accepted definition of shoppingtourists is that of Timothy (2005), which definesshopping tourists as those who primarily visitother countries to go shopping (Liu & Wang,2010; Michalko & Varadi, 2004; Rabbiosi,2011; Tomori, 2010). Moreover, Saayman andSaayman (2012), who investigated shoppingtourism in Africa, defined shopping tourism asa kind of travel primarily motivated by theintention of travelers to go shopping.Accordingly, the definition of Timothy (2005)is adopted in this study. A screening questionwas included in the survey to identify the shop-ping tourists and exclude the non-shoppingtourists (e.g. leisure tourists, medical tourists,and cultural tourists) in the sample. The respon-dents must state their motivations behind theirtravel by answering “yes” or “no” to the state-ment, “I have traveled to other countries withthe main purpose of shopping”. Respondentswho answered “yes” were identified as shop-ping tourists. This study specifically targetedChinese shopping tourists because they havebecome the biggest spenders in the world,with their overseas expenditure reaching US$129 billion in 2013 (UNTWO, 2014).

Data were collected by Qualtrics™, which isthe leading industry provider of online surveysoftware. According to the World UrbanizationProspects issued by The United Nations (2014),the five largest cities in China by population(i.e. Shanghai, Beijing, Tianjin, Guangzhou,and Shenzhen) were chosen as data collectionsites. After data collection, the data were ana-lyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics 20™. Factoranalysis was performed to deduce the factorsrelated to individual values. Cluster and discri-minant analyses were also performed to

Choi, Heo, and Law 9

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

HE

S-SO

Hau

te E

cole

Spé

cial

isée

de

Suis

se O

ccid

enta

le]

at 0

2:37

01

June

201

5

determine the number of clusters and to identifythe cluster centers. Later, chi-square test andanalysis of variance (ANOVA) were conductedto examine the differences among the clusters interms of demographic information and shoppingbehavior.

RESULTS

Sample Profile

As shown in Table 4, the sample included morefemales (52.4%) than males (47.6%). The major-ity of the respondents (89.8%) were between 20and 59 years old. A total of 52.3% had joinedpackage tours, whereas 47.7% were independenttravelers. The shopping products that were mainlypurchased included food items, alcohol, andtobacco (33.6%), and the identified frequent shop-ping venue was outlets (37.0%).

Principal Component Analysis (PCA)

PCA was conducted on the 21 items withorthogonal rotation (varimax). The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) measure verified thesampling adequacy for the analysis. KMO =0.848 is considered “superb”, according toField (2009). Bartlett’s test of sphericity (χ2

(210) = 11352.638, p < 0.001) indicated thatcorrelations between items are sufficient forPCA. An initial analysis was run to obtaineigenvalues for each component in the data.Five components had eigenvalues overKaiser’s criterion of 1 and in the combinationexplained 79.893% of the variance. Factor load-ings of all relevant variables in the rotated factormatrix were clearly related to only one factoreach (Table 5). Cronbach’s α for the five factorsranged from 0.660 to 0.917. These results referto the fact that shopping tourists have differentvalues regarding shopping activities.

TABLE 3. Short Schwartz Values Survey (SSVS) Scale

Dimensions Questions of SSVS

SDI Thinking new ideas and being creative is important to me. I like to do things in my own original way.It is important that I make my own decisions about what to do. I like to be free to plan and to choose my own

activities.POW It is important for me to be rich. I want to have a lot of money and own expensive things.

It is important for me to be in charge and to be the one to tell others what to do. I want people to follow what Isay.

UNI I think it is important that every person in the world be treated equally. I want justice for everybody, even forpeople I do not know.

It is important for me to listen to other people. Even when I disagree with them, I still want to understand them.I strongly believe that people should care for nature. Looking after the environment is important to me.

ACH It is very important for me to show my abilities. I want people to admire what I do.Being very successful is important to me. I like to impress other people.

SEC It is important for me to live in secure surroundings. I avoid anything that might jeopardize my safety.It is very important for me that my country will be safe from threats, whether internally or externally. Social order

should be protected.STI I like surprises and I am always looking for new things to do. I think it is important to do various things in life.

I am adventurous and I like to take risks. I want to have an exciting life.CON I believe that people should do what they are told. I think people should follow rules at all times, even when no

one is watching.It is important for me always to behave properly. I want to avoid doing anything that people would say is wrong.

TRA I think it is important not to ask for more than what I have. I believe that people should be satisfied with whatthey have.

Religion is important to me. I try my best to do what my religion requires.HED Having a good time is important to me. I like to spoil myself.

I seek every chance to have fun. It is important for me to do things that give me pleasure.BEN It is very important for me to help people around me. I want to care for other people.

It is important for me to be loyal to my friends. I want to devote myself to people close to me.

Note. BEN: benevolence; UNI: universalism; SDI: self-direction; STI: stimulation; HED: hedonism; ACH: achievement; POW:power; SEC: security; CON: conformity; TRA: tradition.

10 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

HE

S-SO

Hau

te E

cole

Spé

cial

isée

de

Suis

se O

ccid

enta

le]

at 0

2:37

01

June

201

5

TABLE 4. Respondents’ Background Information (N = 511)

Frequency Percentage (%)

GenderMale 243 47.6Female 268 52.4

Age (years)20 – 29 79 15.530 – 39 110 21.540 – 49 133 26.050 – 59 137 26.860 or over 52 10.2

Highest education level completedLower than high school 19 3.7High school 108 21.1Some college, no degree 61 11.9College 224 43.8Postgraduate or above 99 19.5

Shopping itemGarments/Fabrics/Shoes 52 10.2Leather/Synthetic goods 50 9.8Electrical/Photographic goods 54 10.6Jewelry/Watches 95 18.6Food, alcohol, and tobacco 172 33.6Cosmetics and skin care/perfume 80 15.6Miscellaneous consumer goods 8 1.6

Shopping venueDuty-free shop 29 5.7Department store 106 20.7Shopping center/Shopping mall 125 24.5Outlet 189 37.0Individual shop on street 41 8.0Street vendor 15 2.9Others 6 1.2

Travel modePackage tour 267 52.3Independent tour 244 47.7

CompanionAlone 35 6.8Friends 128 25.0Spouse/Partner 183 35.8Other family members 47 9.2Tour group 118 23.2

Monthly household income (US$)Less than 3,000 42 8.23,001–6,000 113 22.26,001–9,000 207 40.59,001–12,000 89 17.312,001–15,000 45 8.915,001–18,000 14 2.7US 18,001 or above 1 0.2

State of residenceShanghai 100 19.6Beijing 100 19.6Tianjin 100 19.6Guangzhou 106 20.7Shenhen 105 20.5

Choi, Heo, and Law 11

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

HE

S-SO

Hau

te E

cole

Spé

cial

isée

de

Suis

se O

ccid

enta

le]

at 0

2:37

01

June

201

5

Factor 1 exhibited the highest variance(36.446%), with a reliability coefficient of0.660 in the data. This factor incorporated 10items of values (i.e., pleasure, religious life,acceptance of my portion in life, an excitinglife, enjoyment of life, success, adventure-seek-ing, authority, ambition, and wealth). The rela-tively large proportion of the total variance forthis factor leads to the conclusion that self-enhancement represents a central distinguishingtheme among shopping tourists. Specifically,the items pleasure and an exciting life’ showedrelatively high factor loadings. Accordingly,Factor 1 is described as self-enhancement.

Factor 2 identified universalism and focusedon the universalism components of a society.This factor accounted for approximately12.474 % of the variance in the data. Factor 3(12.329% of the variance) was also ratherstraightforward. Self-discipline, meeting obliga-tions, country security, and safe environmentare the focus of this value for shopping tourists.As a result, this factor was aptly named assur-ance. Factor 4 was named self-direction, whichfocused on openness-to-change components ofvalues, and accounted for approximately9.775% of the variance in the data. Factor 5(8.870% of the variance) was benevolence,

TABLE 5. Factor Analysis of Schwartz Values of Shopping Tourists

Factor Factorloading

Eigenvalue Varianceexplained

Cronbach’sα

Mean Standarddeviation

1: Self-enhancement 7.654 36.446 0.660 4.10 2.094Pleasure 0.920 3.95 2.287Religious life 0.918 3.82 2.280Acceptance of my lot in life 0.913 3.96 2.158An exciting life 0.903 4.19 2.096Enjoyment of life 0.893 3.94 2.171Success 0.854 4.35 1.963Adventure-seeking 0.849 4.41 1.905Authority (the right to lead or

command)0.733 4.79 1.963

Ambition 0.727 3.40 1.913Wealth 0.651 4.24 1.843

2: Universalism 2.620 12.474 0.897 2.54 1.473Equity 0.938 2.45 1.435Tolerance of different ideas and

beliefs0.926 2.35 1.394

Unity with nature (fitting into nature) 0.817 2.80 1.550

3: Assurance 2.589 12.329 0.808 2.72 1.500Self-discipline 0.843 2.87 1.319Obedience 0.749 2.50 1.356Security of the country visited 0.719 2.91 1.631Safety environment 0.651 2.59 1.631

4: Self-direction 2.053 9.775 0.917 2.54 1.744Creativity 0.853 2.37 1.651Independence 0.845 2.71 1.818

5: Benevolence 1.863 8.870 0.883 1.96 0.903Faithfulness 0.936 1.99 0.923Sincerity 0.932 1.94 0.881

Total variance extracted (%) 79.893Cronbach’s α of all items 0.802

Note. 1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree.

12 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

HE

S-SO

Hau

te E

cole

Spé

cial

isée

de

Suis

se O

ccid

enta

le]

at 0

2:37

01

June

201

5

which included faithfulness to friends and to thegroup, and sincerity.

Segmenting Shopping Tourists

Cluster analysis was performed on groupshopping tourists based on their personalvalues. Table 6 presents the result of the clusteranalysis by the K-means clustering method. TheANOVA test result, which was implemented toinvestigate the cluster segmentation and the dif-ferences among the Schwartz value factors viaclusters, showed differences among the clustersat the 1% level. In addition, Scheffe’s post hocanalysis confirmed that statistical differencesappeared in each cluster, thereby confirmingthat the four clusters were appropriately classi-fied. However, only one factor, benevolence,was not significantly distinctive among the clus-ters. Cluster 1 represented 45.6% of the totalsurvey respondents, wherein the five factors(i.e. self-enhancement, universalism, assurance,self-direction, and benevolence) appeared lowin general. Specifically, the mean scores ofself-direction and assurance were low, indicat-ing 1.67 and 1.97 respectively. Thus, the clusterwas called uncertainty.

Cluster 2 represented 18.8% of the totalrespondents, wherein the characteristics of self-enhancement and self-development appearedslightly higher than those of other factors. Thecluster was called passion because it representedan egocentric and open character. Cluster 3represented 11.5% of the respondents, whereinall factors appeared high on average. The meanvalue of universalism was particularly high,

indicating 5.67. As a result, Cluster 3 wasnamed universalism. Finally, Cluster 4, whichrepresented 24.1% of the respondents, showedhigher self-enhancement and assurance than thetotal average. This cluster was considered to be arepresentation of self-enhancement and assur-ance, thus Cluster 4 was called conservation.

A discriminant analysis was performed toconfirm the Schwartz value factors that affectedthe cluster classification (Table 7). Self-enhancement was shown as the most importantfactor in the first discriminant function in seg-regating clusters. Universalism and self-enhancement were most important in the secondand third functions respectively. The discrimi-nant analysis results were also used to validatethe cluster classification. The leave-one-outcross-validation proposed by Hair, Black,Babin, Anderson, and Tatham (2010) wasadopted in this study. To deduce the best resulton smaller samples and produce unbiased esti-mations, cross-validation was conducted. Theclassification accuracy of the original dataused in discriminant analysis was 92.0%,while that of the leave-one-out cross-validationdata was 92.0%. The classification accuracy ofthe cross-validation confirmed the validity ofthe cluster analysis result.

Cluster Differences Based on theCharacteristics and Shopping Behaviorsof the Shopping Tourists

Each market group must have similardemands and attitudes to meet the demands oftourists, and the clusters are significant if they

TABLE 6. Cluster Means Based on Schwartz Values

Factor Cluster 1: Uncertainty(n = 233, 45.6%)

Cluster 2: Passion(n = 96, 18.8%)

Cluster 3:Universalism

(n = 59, 11.5%)

Cluster 4: Conservation(n = 123, 24.1%)

F-value

Self-enhancement 3.22 4.96 4.76 4.80 288.602*Universalism 2.01 2.20 5.67 2.28 471.541*Assurance 1.97 2.64 3.84 3.66 132.075*Self-direction 1.65 5.60 2.27 1.96 659.209*Benevolence 2.00 1.83 1.98 2.00 .999

Note. 1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree; *p < 0.01.

Choi, Heo, and Law 13

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

HE

S-SO

Hau

te E

cole

Spé

cial

isée

de

Suis

se O

ccid

enta

le]

at 0

2:37

01

June

201

5

can be distinguished by determining the perso-nal characteristics of the tourists (Weinstein,1987). In this study, a couple of chi-squaretests were performed to investigate the differ-ences among clusters based on the characteris-tics of the shopping tourists. Table 8 shows thesummary of chi-square test results. First, genderratio is balanced among all clusters. Tourists intheir twenties to thirties represented 37% of allclusters, while those in their forties to fiftiesrepresented 52.8%, and those aged 60 yearsand over represented 10.2%. Clusters 1 (uncer-tainty) and 4 (conservation) had higher ratios ofthe 60-and-over age group, while Clusters 2(passion) and 3 (universalism) representedhigher ratios of the younger generations. Anoverall balance was presented in terms of travelmode, with packaged tours of 52.3% and inde-pendent tours of 47.7%. The package tours arerelatively higher in Clusters 1 (uncertainty) and4 (conservation) at 61.4% and 57.7% respec-tively, while independent tours are the majorityin Clusters 2 (passion) and 3 (universalism) at70.8% and 57.6% respectively. Clusters 1(uncertainty) and 4 (conservation) mainly pur-chased food, alcohol, and tobacco (48.0% and39.8% respectively), while Clusters 2 (passion)and 3 (universalism) mainly bought jewelry andwatches (30.2% and 54.2% respectively). Theresults indicated different shopping patterns.Clusters 1 (uncertainty) and 4 (conservation)mainly visited outlets (49.4% and 35.8%respectively), while Clusters 2 (passion) and 3

(universalism) mostly visited department stores(35.4% and 39.0% respectively). Lastly, Cluster1 (uncertainty) mainly traveled with friends(31.8%) while other clusters traveled with theirspouses or partners.

A number of ANOVA tests investigated thedifferences in the shopping behavior of the fourclusters (Table 9). Shopping behavior includedvariables such as length of stay, total expendi-ture, and shopping expenditure. The validationresults of the differences of each variable werestatistically different among the clusters. Inaddition, Scheffe’s post hoc test identifiedClusters 3 (universalism) and 2 (passion) ashaving longer shopping tour periods thanClusters 1 (uncertainty) and 4 (conservation).Clusters 2 (passion) and 3 (universalism)appeared to have a larger total expenditurethan Cluster 4 (conservation), while Cluster 1(uncertainty) spent the least amount. Finally, thecomparison of shopping expenditures showedthat Cluster 3 (universalism) spent the largestamount, followed by Clusters 2 (passion), 4(conservation), and 1 (uncertainty).

CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION

This study identified four types of shoppingtourist, based on Schwartz values. The factor ana-lysis revealed that the five factors of personalvalues among Chinese shopping tourists wereself-enhancement, universalism, assurance, self-

TABLE 7. Discriminant Analysis Results

Function Eigenvalue Percent of varianceexplained by function

Canonicalcorrelation

Wilks’lambda

Chi-square

df Significance

1 4.469 51.2 0.904 0.022 1935.198 15 0.0002 3.305 37.9 0.876 0.119 1076.295 8 0.0003 0.953 10.9 0.699 0.512 338.325 3 0.000

Discriminant loading Function 1 Function 2 Function 3

Self-enhancement 0.318 0.511 0.642Universalism −0.212 0.845 −0.488Assurance −0.018 0.396 0.523Self-direction 0.906 0.241 −0.215Benevolence −0.035 −0.007 0.012

Note. 92.6% of original grouped cases correctly classified; 92.0% of cross-validated grouped cases correctly classified.

14 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

HE

S-SO

Hau

te E

cole

Spé

cial

isée

de

Suis

se O

ccid

enta

le]

at 0

2:37

01

June

201

5

TABLE

8.Chi-squ

areTes

tRes

ults

Cluster

1:Unc

ertainty

Cluster

2:Pas

sion

Cluster

3:Unive

rsalism

Cluster

4:Con

servation

Total

(%)

Statistics

Gen

der

Chi-squ

are=8.45

4df

=3

p<0.05

Male

97(41.6)

47(49.0)

28(47.5)

71(57.7)

243(47.6)

Fem

ale

136(58.4)

49(51.0)

31(52.5)

52(42.3)

268(52.4)

Age(yea

rs)

Chi-squ

are=11

9.78

2df=12

p<0.01

20–29

11(4.7)

25(26.0)

12(20.3)

31(25.2)

79(15.5)

30–39

33(14.2)

31(32.3)

24(40.7)

22(17.9)

110(21.5)

40–49

58(24.9)

34(35.4)

10(16.9)

31(25.2)

133(26.0)

50–59

103(44.2)

3(3.1)

8(13.6)

23(18.7)

137(26.8)

60or

abov

e28

(12.0)

3(3.1)

5(8.5)

16(13.0)

52(10.2)

Trav

elmode

Chi-squ

are=32

.060

df=3

p<0.01

Pac

kage

dtour

143(61.4)

28(29.2)

25(42.4)

71(57.7)

267(52.3)

Inde

pend

enttour

90(38.6)

68(70.8)

34(57.6)

52(42.3)

244(47.7)

Shoppingitem

Chi-squ

are=17

8.37

2df

=18

p<0.01

Garmen

ts/Fab

rics/Sho

es13

(5.6)

21(21.7)

3(5.1)

15(12.2)

52(10.2)

Leathe

r/Syn

thetic

good

s19

(8.2)

14(14.6)

5(8.5)

12(9.8)

50(9.8)

Electric

al/Pho

tograp

hicgo

ods

18(7.7)

18(18.8)

12(20.3)

6(4.9)

54(10.6)

Jewelry/W

atch

es21

(9.0)

29(30.2)

32(54.2)

13(10.6)

95(18.6)

Foo

d,alco

hol,an

dtoba

cco

112(48.0)

8(8.4)

3(5.1)

49(39.8)

172(33.6)

Cos

meticsan

dskin

care/perfume

50(21.5)

4(4.2)

2(3.4)

24(19.5)

80(15.7)

Misce

llane

ousco

nsum

ergo

ods

0(0.0)

2(2.1)

2(3.4)

4(3.3)

8(1.6)

Shoppingve

nue

Chi-squ

are=75

.398

df=18

p<0.01

Duty-free

shop

9(3.9)

7(7.3)

4(6.8)

9(7.3)

29(5.7)

Dep

artm

entstore

29(12.4)

34(35.4)

23(39.0)

20(16.3)

106(20.7)

Sho

ppingce

nter/Sho

ppingmall

41(17.6)

25(26.0)

18(30.5)

41(33.3)

125(24.5)

Outlet

115(49.4)

18(18.8)

12(20.3)

44(35.8)

189(37.0)

Individu

alsh

opon

street

24(10.3)

9(9.4)

2(3.4)

6(4.9)

41(8.0)

Stree

tve

ndor

10(4.3)

2(2.1)

0(0.0)

3(2.4)

15(2.9)

Others

5(2.1)

1(1.0)

0(0.0)

0(0.0)

6(1.2)

Compan

ion

Chi-squ

are=31

.764

df=12

p<0.01

Alone

26(11.2)

3(3.1)

2(3.4)

4(3.3)

35(6.8)

Frie

nds

74(31.8)

17(17.7)

10(16.9)

27(22.0)

128(25.0)

(Con

tinue

d)

Choi, Heo, and Law 15

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

HE

S-SO

Hau

te E

cole

Spé

cial

isée

de

Suis

se O

ccid

enta

le]

at 0

2:37

01

June

201

5

TABLE

8.(C

ontin

ued)

Cluster

1:Unc

ertainty

Cluster

2:Pas

sion

Cluster

3:Unive

rsalism

Cluster

4:Con

servation

Total

(%)

Statistics

Spo

use/Partner

64(27.4)

45(46.9)

26(44.1)

48(39.0)

183(35.8)

Other

family

mem

bers

22(9.4)

9(9.4)

4(6.8)

12(9.8)

47(9.2)

Tou

rgrou

p47

(20.2)

22(22.9)

17(28.8)

32(26.0)

118(23.1)

Monthly

house

hold

inco

meUS$

Chi-squ

are=24

0.18

2df

=12

p<0.01

Less

than

3,00

030

(12.9)

4(4.2)

2(3.4)

6(4.9)

42(8.2)

3,00

1–6,00

015

(6.4)

32(33.3)

17(28.8)

49(39.8)

113(22.1)

6,00

1–9,00

095

(40.8)

47(49.0)

11(18.6)

54(43.9)

207(40.5)

9,00

1–12

,000

81(34.8)

2(2.1)

0(0.0)

6(4.9)

89(17.4)

12,001

–15

,000

9(3.9)

10(10.4)

19(32.2)

7(5.7)

45(8.8)

15,001

–18

,000

2(0.8)

1(1.0)

10(16.9)

1(0.8)

14(2.7)

18,001

orab

ove

1(0.4)

0(0.0)

0(0.0)

0(0.0)

1(0.2)

TABLE

9.ANOVA

Tes

tRes

ults

Cluster

1:Unc

ertainty

(n=23

3,45

.6%)

Cluster

2:Pas

sion

(n=96

,18

.8%)

Cluster

3:Unive

rsalism

(n=59

,11

.5%)

Cluster

4:Con

servation

(n=12

3,24

.1%)

Finding

s

Leng

thof

stay

b1.97

2.81

2.59

2.24

Cluster

1,Cluster

4<Cluster

3,Cluster

2*a

Total

expe

nditu

rec

1.88

3.01

4.78

2.15

Cluster

1,Cluster

4<Cluster

2<

Cluster

3*Sho

pping

expe

nditu

red

1.00

3.35

4.92

1.76

Cluster

1<Cluster

4<Cluster

2<

Cluster

3*

Note.

ap<0.01

;bLe

ngth

ofstay

(1=da

ytrip,2=1–

2nigh

ts,3=3–

4nigh

ts,4=5nigh

tsor

more);c total

expe

nditu

re(1

=less

than

US$3,00

0,2=US$3,00

1–6,00

0,3=US$

6,00

1–9,00

0,4=US$9,00

1–12

,000

,5=US$12

,001

–15

,000

,6=US$15

,001

–18

,000

,7=US$18

,001

orab

ove);dsh

opping

expe

nditu

re(1

=less

than

US$2,00

0,2=US$

2,00

1–40

00,3=US$4,00

1–6,00

0,4=US$6,00

1–8,00

0,5=US$8,00

1–10

,000

,6=US$10

,001

–12

,000

,7=US$12

,001

orab

ove).

16 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

HE

S-SO

Hau

te E

cole

Spé

cial

isée

de

Suis

se O

ccid

enta

le]

at 0

2:37

01

June

201

5

direction, and benevolence. The self-enhance-ment factor had the largest proportion of thetotal variance at 36.446%, suggesting that thisdimension is the central distinguishing theme forshopping trips. Other prominent personal valuedimensions were universalism (equity, toleranceof different ideas and beliefs, and unity with nat-ure), assurance (self-discipline, obedience, secur-ity of the country visited, and safety of theenvironment), self-direction (creativity and inde-pendence), and benevolence (faithfulness and sin-cerity). The findings in this study are theoreticallysimilar to those of previous research (Roccas,Sagiv, Schwartz, & Knafo, 2002).

The cluster analysis, which used the afore-mentioned five factors, identifies the followingclusters: uncertainty (Cluster 1), passion(Cluster 2), universalism (Cluster 3), and con-servation (Cluster 4). Uncertainty (Cluster 1,n = 233) represented 45.6% of the total surveyrespondents, wherein the five factors (i.e. self-enhancement, universalism, assurance, self-direction, and benevolence) appeared low ingeneral. Passion (Cluster 2, n = 96) represented18.8% of the total respondents, wherein thecharacteristics of self-enhancement and self-development appeared slightly higher thanthose of other factors. Universalism (Cluster 3,n = 59) represented 11.5% of the respondents,wherein all factors appeared high on average.Finally, Conservation (Cluster 4, n = 123),which represented 24.1% of the respondents,showed higher self-enhancement and assurancethan the total average.

Chi-square test results showed the cluster dif-ferences based on the shopping behaviors ofshopping tourists. Clusters 1 (uncertainty) and 4(conservation) mainly purchased food, alcohol,and tobacco (48.0% and 39.8% respectively),while Clusters 2 (passion) and 3 (universalism)mainly bought jewelry and watches (30.2% and54.2% respectively). The results indicated differ-ent shopping patterns. Clusters 1 (uncertainty)and 4 (conservation) mainly visited outlets(49.4% and 35.8% respectively), while Clusters2 (passion) and 3 (universalism) mostly visiteddepartment stores (35.4% and 39.0% respec-tively). Lastly, Cluster 1 (uncertainty) mainlytraveled with friends (31.8%) while other clusterstraveled with their spouses or partners.

The clusters grouped based on the Schwartzvalues also showed different shopping tenden-cies. Thus, the study focused on the differencesin actual shopping tour periods and frequency.One interesting conclusion was that no distinc-tive differences were found regarding shoppingtour period. Nevertheless, Scheffe’s post hocanalysis result confirmed that Clusters 3 (uni-versalism) and 2 (passion) stayed longer forshopping tours than Clusters 1 (uncertainty)and 4 (conservation). The significance presentedby the mean value showed that all clustersstayed for less than four nights. However, sub-stantial differences were found with regard toshopping expenditure. Cluster 3 (universalism)spent the largest amount on shopping, followedby Clusters 2 (passion), 4 (conservation), and 1(uncertainty). Upon closer inspection, Cluster 3(universalism) had a mean value of 4.92, whichwas substantially different from the 1.00 valueof Cluster 1 (uncertainty). Given that the actualshopping expenditure was measured using anordinal scale, Cluster 3 (universalism) spentUS$ 6,001–US$ 8,000 per person, whileCluster 1 (uncertainty) spent less than US$2,000. The four clusters also showed substantialdifferences in their total tour expenditure, whichincludes shopping expenditure. Clusters 2 (pas-sion) and 3 (universalism) were the highestspenders, followed by Clusters 4 (conservation)and 1 (uncertainty).

This study has a number of implications forboth destination marketing and product devel-opment. Initially, a rethink of the importance ofthe shopping tourist market with the personalvalue of universalism may be required. Table 8shows that the big spender group, Cluster 3, hasdisplayed a great interest in jewelry/watches(54.2%) and electrical/photographic goods(20.3%). Not surprisingly, Cluster 3 showedthe highest total travel expenditure and monthlyhousehold income, which may be linked tomaterialism in China. China has experiencedstrong economic development in recent years,averaging about 10% growth per year over thepast 15 years (Xie, Bagozzi, & Yang, 2013).Chinese citizens are becoming more affluentand have broad access to branded productsand luxury items (e.g. jewelry/watches).According to Auken, Wells, and Borgia

Choi, Heo, and Law 17

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

HE

S-SO

Hau

te E

cole

Spé

cial

isée

de

Suis

se O

ccid

enta

le]

at 0

2:37

01

June

201

5

(2014), the desire to obtain material possessionsincreases with increasing levels of affluence.Compared with materialism in Western coun-tries, which occurs under conditions of devel-opment in more advanced stages, materialism inChina is still at its early stage of growth (Khare,2014). Moreover, materialism can occur moreoften in the context of wealthy people, implyingthat the more people earn, the more they possess(Auken et al., 2014; Xie et al., 2013). Theresearch findings partially support materialismin China. In summary, respondents in Clusters2 and 3, who have relatively higher monthlyincomes than other Clusters, have a tendency topurchase luxury items, such as jewelry/watches.

This study makes a meaningful and uniquecontribution to the extant body of shopping tour-ism research. Despite the abundance of studies ontourist shopping and shopping tourism (Michalko& Ratz, 2006; Tosun et al., 2007), no previousresearch clearly targets shopping tourists. Byemploying a rigorous screening method, the cur-rent study accurately identified shopping tourists,who travel for the main purpose of shopping. Thecurrent study also provides insights into the natureof personal values of Chinese shopping tourists byapplying the Schwartz values. The study alsoidentified the shopping travel characteristics ofChinese shopping tourists.

LIMITATIONS

The present study has two limitations. First,generalization may not be possible because ofthe limited sample number and regional scope.Supplements are required by follow-up studies.Second, future studies are expected to designmore questions regarding shopping activities(e.g. target shopping areas and willingness topay for specific items).

REFERENCES

Andreu, L., Kozak, M., Avci, N., & Cifter, N. (2005).Market segmentation by motivations to travel: Britishtourists visiting Turkey. Journal of Travel & TourismMarketing, 19(1), 1–14. doi:10.1300/J073v19n01_01

Auken, S. V., Wells, L. G., & Borgia, D. J. (2014).Assessing materialism among the future elites of

China. Journal of International Consumer Marketing,26(2), 88–105. doi:10.1080/08961530.2014.878202

Bardi, A., & Schwartz, S. H. (2003). Values and behavior:Strength and structure of relations. Personality andSocial Psychology Bulletin, 29(10), 1207–1220.doi:10.1177/0146167203254602

Barutcu, S., Dogan, H., & Unguren, E. (2011). Touristsperception and satisfaction of shopping in Alanyaregion: A comparative analysis of differentnationalities. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 24,1049–1059.

Becken, S., Simmons, D., & Frampton, C. (2003).Segmenting tourists by their travel pattern for insightsinto achieving energy efficiency. Journal of TravelResearch, 42, 48–56. doi:10.1177/0047287503253938

Brunsø, K., Scholderer, J., & Grunert, K. G. (2004). Testingrelationships between values and food-related lifestyle:Results from two European countries. Appetite, 43, 195–205. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2004.05.001

Chang, J. (2006). Segmenting tourists to aboriginal cul-tural festivals: An example in the Rukai tribal area,Taiwan. Tourism Management, 27, 1224–1234.doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2005.05.019

Chernenko, S., & Sunderam, A. (2011). The real conse-quences of market segmentation. Review of FinancialStudies, 3(2), 110–132.

Chung, M. K. H., & Heung, V. C. S. (2007). Tipping beha-vior of diners in three upscale Chinese restaurants inHong Kong. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research,12(3), 169–180. doi:10.1080/10941660701416739

Cochrane, J. (2006). A typology of tourists to protectedareas. The Visitor Experience Challenge, 16(2), 10–15.

Crompton, J. (1979). Motivations for pleasure vacation.Annals of Tourism Research, 6, 408–424. doi:10.1016/0160-7383(79)90004-5

Dolnicar, S., & Leisch, F. (2003). Winter tourist segments inAustria: Identifying stable vacation styles using baggedclustering techniques. Journal of Travel Research, 41,281–292. doi:10.1177/0047287502239037

Doong, H.-S., Wang, H.-C., & Law, R. (2012). Anexamination of the determinants of in-flight duty-free shopping: Hedonic and utilitarian motivations.International Journal of Tourism Research, 14, 303–306. doi:10.1002/jtr.1870

Doran, C. J. (2009). The role of personal values in fairtrade consumption. Journal of Business Ethics, 84,549–563. doi:10.1007/s10551-008-9724-1

Fairhurst, A., Costello, C., & Holmes, A. F. (2007). Anexamination of shopping behavior of visitors toTennessee according to tourist typologies. Journal ofVacation Marketing, 13(4), 311–320. doi:10.1177/1356766707081005

Feather, N. T. (1990). Bridging the gap between valuesand actions: Recent applications of the expectancy-value model. In T. E. Higgins & R. M. Sorrentino(Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition:

18 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

HE

S-SO

Hau

te E

cole

Spé

cial

isée

de

Suis

se O

ccid

enta

le]

at 0

2:37

01

June

201

5

Foundations of social behavior (Vol. 2, pp. 151–192).New York, NY: Guildford Press.

Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (3rded.). London: Sage.

Fodness, D. (1994). Measuring tourist motivation. Annalsof Tourism Research, 21, 555–581. doi:10.1016/0160-7383(94)90120-1

Frochot, I. (2005). A benefit segmentation of tourists in ruralareas: A Scottish perspective. Tourism Management, 26,335–346. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2003.11.016

Gholipour, H. F., Tajaddini, R., & Al-mulali, U. (2014).Does personal freedom influence outbound tourism?Tourism Management, 41(1), 19–25. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2013.08.010

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., &Tatham, R. L. (2010). Multivariate data analysis.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Hede, A. M., Jago, L., & Deery, M. (2004). Segmentationof special event attendees using personal values:Relationships with satisfaction and behavioural inten-tions. Hospitality, Tourism, and Lifestyle Concepts, 5(2–4), 33–55.

Heung, V. C. S., & Qu, H. (1998). Tourism shopping andits contributions to Hong Kong. Tourism Management,19(4), 383–386. doi:10.1016/S0261-5177(98)00029-6

Hong Kong Tourism Board. (2013). A statistical review ofHong Kong tourism: December 2013. Hong Kong:Author.

Ignatov, E., & Smith, S. (2006). Segmenting Canadianculinary tourists. Current Issues in Tourism, 9(3),235–255. doi:10.2167/cit/229.0

Iso-Ahola, S. E. (1982). Toward a social psychologicaltheory of tourism motivation: A rejoinder. Annals ofTourism Research, 9, 256–262. doi:10.1016/0160-7383(82)90049-4

Kemperman, A. D. A. M., Borgers, A. W. J., &Timmermans, H. J. P. (2009). Tourist shopping behaviorin a historic downtown area. Tourism Management, 30,208–218. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2008.06.002

Khare, A. (2014). Money attitudes, materialism, and com-pulsiveness: Scale development and validation. Journalof Global Marketing, 27(1), 30–45. doi:10.1080/08911762.2013.850140

Kim, J. H., & Ritchie, B. W. (2012). Motivation-basedtypology: An empirical study of golf tourists. Journalof Hospitality & Tourism Research, 36(2), 251–280.doi:10.1177/1096348010388661

Kinley, T. R., Josiam, B. M., & Kim, Y. K. (2003). Whyand where tourists shop: Motivations of tourist shop-pers and their preferred shopping centerattributes. Journal of Shopping Center Research,10(1), 7–28.

Kluckhohn, C. (1951). Values and value-orientation in thetheory of action: An exploration in definition and clas-sification. In T. Parson & E. Shils (Eds.), Towards a

general theory of action (pp. 388–433). Cambridge,MA: Harvard University Press.

Kluckhohn, C., & Strodbeck, F. L. (1961). Variations in valueorientation. Evaston, IL: Row Peterson and Company.

Kotler, P. (1997). Marketing management: Analysis, plan-ning, implementation, and control (9th ed.). UpperSaddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Lee, C.-K., Lee, Y.-K., Bernhard, B. J., &Yoon, Y.-S. (2006).Segmenting casino gamblers by motivation: A clusteranalysis of Korean gamblers. Tourism Management, 27,856–866. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2005.05.009

Liu, J., & Wang, R. (2010). Attractive model and market-ing implications of Theme Shopping Tourism destina-tion. Chinese Geographical Science, 20(6), 562–567.doi:10.1007/s11769-010-0422-4

Liu, S.-C., Choi, T.-M., & Lee, W. T. (2008). Tourists’satisfaction levels and shopping preferences under thesolo travel policy in Hong Kong. Journal of FashionMarketing and Management: An International Journal,12(3), 351–364. doi:10.1108/13612020810889308

Mai, H. T. X., & Olsen, S. O. (2013). Consumer participa-tion in virtual communities: The role of personal valuesand personality. Journal of Marketing Communications,4(1), 1–21. doi:10.1080/13527266.2012.736086

Maio, G. R., & Olson, J. M. (1994). Value-attitude-beha-viour relations: The moderating role of attitude func-tions. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33,301–312. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1994.tb01027.x

McKercher, B. (2002). Towards a classification of culturaltourists. International Journal of Tourism Research, 4,29–38. doi:10.1002/jtr.346

Mehmetoglu, M. (2007). Typologising nature-based tour-ists by activity-theoretical and practical implications.Tourism Management, 28, 651–660. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2006.02.006

Mehrabian, A., & Russell, J. A. (1974). An approach toenvironmental psychology. Cambridge, MA: MITPress.

Meng, F., Xu, Y., & Fowler, D. C. (2012). Tourism shop-ping behavior: Planned, impulsive, or experiential?International Journal of Culture, Tourism andHospitality Research, 6(3), 250–265. doi:10.1108/17506181211246401

Menzly, L., & Ozbas, O. (2010). Market segmentation andcross-predictability of returns. The Journal of Finance,65, 1555–1580. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6261.2010.01578.x

Mervis, C. B., & Rosch, E. (1981). Categorization ofnatural objects. Annual Review of Psychology, 32,89–115. doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.32.020181.000513

Michalko, G., & Ratz, T. (2006). Typically female featuresin Hungarian shopping tourism. Mijracijske I EntickeTeme, 22(1–2), 79–93.

Michalkó, G., & Varadi, Z. (2004). Croatian shoppingtourism in Hungary: The case study of Barcs.Tourism, 52(4), 351–359.

Choi, Heo, and Law 19

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

HE

S-SO

Hau

te E

cole

Spé

cial

isée

de

Suis

se O

ccid

enta

le]

at 0

2:37

01

June

201

5

Molera, L., & Albaladejo, I. P. (2007). Profiling segmentsof tourists in rural areas of South-Eastern Spain.Tourism Management, 28, 757–767. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2006.05.006

Norman, M. G., Sorrentino, R., Windell, D., & Manchanda,R. (2008). Are personal values of importance in thestigmatization of people with mental illness? CanadianJournal of Psychiatry, 53(12), 848–856.

Paige, R. C., & Littrell, M. A. (2003). Tourism activitiesand shopping preferences. Journal of Shopping CenterResearch, 10(2), 7–25.

Park, D.-B., & Yoon, Y.-S. (2009). Segmentation bymotivation in rural tourism: A Korean case study.Tourism Management, 30, 99–108. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2008.03.011

Park, K. S., Reisinger, Y., & Noh, E. H. (2010). Luxuryshopping in tourism. International Journal of TourismResearch, 12, 164–178.

Peter, P. J., & Olson, J. C. (1990). Consumer behavior andmarketing strategy (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: Donnelly.

Rabbiosi, C. (2011). The invention of shopping tourism.The discursive repositioning of landscape in an Italianretail-led case. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change,9(2), 70–86. doi:10.1080/14766825.2010.549233

Roccas, S., Sagiv, L., Schwartz, S. H., & Knafo, A.(2002). The big five personality factors and personalvalues. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28,789–801. doi:10.1177/0146167202289008

Rohan, M. J. (2000). A rose by any name? The valuesconstructs. Personality and Social Psychology Review,4, 255–27. doi:10.1207/S15327957PSPR0403_4

Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. NewYork, NY: Free Press.

Saayman, M., & Saayman, A. (2012). Shopping tourism ortourists shopping? A case study of South Africa’sAfrican tourism market. Tourism Economics, 18(6),1313–1329. doi:10.5367/te.2012.0169

Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content andstructure of values: Theoretical advances and empiricaltests in 20 countries. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances inexperimental and social psychology (Vol. 25, pp.1–65). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Schwartz, S. H. (2003). A proposal for measuring valueorientations across nations. ESS QuestionnaireDevelopment Report (Chapter 7). Retrieved fromhttp://www.europeansocialsurvey.org

Schwartz, S. H., & Bilsky, W. (1987). Toward a universalpsychological structure of human values. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 53, 550–562.

Schwartz, S. H., & Bilsky, W. (1990). Toward a theory ofthe universal content and structure of values:Extensions and cross-cultural replications. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 58, 878–891.doi:10.1037/0022-3514.58.5.878

Snepenger, D. J., Murphy, L., O’Connell, R., & Gregg, E.(2003). Tourists and residents use of a shopping space.

Annals of Tourism Research, 30(3), 567–580.doi:10.1016/S0160-7383(03)00026-4

The United Nations. (2014, July). World urbanizationprospects. New York, NY: Author.

The United Nations World Tourism Organization. (2014,May). Global Report on Shopping Tourism. Madrid:Author.

Timothy, D. J. (2005). Shopping tourism, retailing andleisure. Clevedon: Channel View.

Timothy, D. J., & Butler, R. W. (1995). Cross-bordershopping: A North American perspective. Annals ofTourism Research, 22(1), 16–34. doi:10.1016/0160-7383(94)00052-T

Tomori, M. (2010). Investigating shopping tourism alongthe borders of Hungary- A theoretical perspective. GeoJournal of Tourism and Geosites, 2(6), 202–210.

Tosun, C. (2001). Challenges of sustainable tourism devel-opment in the developing world: The case of Turkey.Tourism Management, 22(3), 289–303. doi:10.1016/S0261-5177(00)00060-1

Tosun, C., & Fyall, A. (2005). Making tourism sustain-able: Prospects and pitfalls. In F. Adaman & M. Arsel(Eds.), Environmentalism in Turkey: Between democ-racy and development (pp. 249–262). Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing.

Tosun, C., Temizkan, S. P., Timothy, D., & Fyall, A.(2007). Tourist shopping experiences and satisfaction.International Journal of Tourism Research, 9, 87–102.doi:10.1002/jtr.595

Way, K. A., & Robertson, L. J. (2013). Shopping and tourismpatterns of attendees of the bikes, blues & BBQ festival.Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 22,116–133. doi:10.1080/19368623.2012.627261

Weinstein, A. (1987). Market segmentation. Chicago, IL:Probus.

Wickens, E. (2002). The sacred and the profane: A touristtypology. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(3), 834–851.doi:10.1016/S0160-7383(01)00088-3

Wong, I. A., & Wan, Y. K. P. (2013). A systematicapproach to scale development in tourist shoppingsatisfaction: Linking destination attributes and shop-ping experience. Journal of Travel Research, 52(1),29–41. doi:10.1177/0047287512457263

Wong, I. K. A. (2013). Mainland Chinese shopping pre-ferences and service perceptions in the Asian gamingdestination of Macau. Journal of Vacation Marketing,19(3), 239–251. doi:10.1177/1356766712459737

Wong, J., & Law, R. (2003). Difference in shopping satis-faction levels: A study of tourists in Hong Kong.Tourism Management, 24, 401–410. doi:10.1016/S0261-5177(02)00114-0

Wongkit, M., & McKercher, B. (2013). Toward a typol-ogy of medical tourists: A case study of Thailand.Tourism Management, 38, 4–12. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2013.02.003

20 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

HE

S-SO

Hau

te E

cole

Spé

cial

isée

de

Suis

se O

ccid

enta

le]

at 0

2:37

01

June

201

5

Xie, C., Bagozzi, R. P., & Yang, Z. (2013). Emergingmaterialism in China: Qualitative and quantitativeinsights. Journal of International Consumer Marketing,25(3), 127–151. doi:10.1080/08961530.2013.780446

Xu, Y., & McGehee, N. G. (2012). Shopping behavior ofChinese tourists visiting the United States: Letting theshoppers do the talking. Tourism Management, 33,427–430. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2011.05.003

Yu, H., & Littrell, M. A. (2005). Tourists’ shopping orien-tations for handcrafts: What are key influences?Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 18(4), 1–19.doi:10.1300/J073v18n04_01

Yüksel, A. (2007). Tourist shopping habitat: Effects onemotions, shopping value and behaviours. TourismManagement, 28, 58–69. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2005.07.017

SUBMITTED: July 14, 2014FINAL REVISION SUBMITTED:

October 13, 2014ACCEPTED: December 4, 2014REFEREED ANONYMOUSLY

Choi, Heo, and Law 21

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

HE

S-SO

Hau

te E

cole

Spé

cial

isée

de

Suis

se O

ccid

enta

le]

at 0

2:37

01

June

201

5