Examining relationships among food’s perceived value,well-being,and tourists’ loyalty

Abstract

Although tourist destinations’ local food is increasingly popular with tourists, the problem of how food’s perceived value affects tourists’ loyalty still exists. Based on an investigation of 497 tourists in Guangzhou, China, this study explores the relationships among food’s perceived value, well-being, and tourists’ loyalty. Results show that emotional value, functional value, and social value indirectly affect tourists’ loyalty through the mediating effects of two dimensions of well-being (hedonic and eudaimonic). This paper offers fresh insight on the role of local food and provides suggestions for destination stakeholders on how to use local food to enhance tourists’ loyalty.

Keywords

Perceived value well-being tourist loyalty local food PLS-SEM

Introduction

Perceived value, well-being, and loyalty are closely related to tourists’ destination experiences and have received considerable attention (Chi and Qu, 2008; Lai et al., 2021; Ryan and Deci, 2001; Sheth et al., 1991; Smith and Diekmann, 2017; Song et al., 2015). Nevertheless, few studies have discussed the impact mechanisms among these concepts. Perceived value is a multi-dimensional construct including functional, emotional, and social aspects. Additionally, well-being research has shifted from borrowing the concept of subjective well-being from psychology to integrating hedonic and eudaimonic perspectives. As such, the associated knowledge gap has been exacerbated. Some scholars have contended that one of the contributions of tourism is to improve one’s quality of life (Dolnicar et al., 2012; Gilbert and Abdullah, 2004; McCabe and Johnson, 2013); indeed, tourism can enhance positive emotions and life satisfaction (Gilbert and Abdullah, 2004; Neal et al., 1999). Yet the literature has not tested how different aspects of tourists’ perceived value affect perceptions of hedonic well-being and eudaimonic well-being. Given these voids, we consider it necessary to examine whether tourists’ perceived value influences their hedonic and eudaimonic well-being and in turn their loyalty.

Research has also indicated that different types of tourism activities have distinct effects on hedonic well-being and eudaimonic well-being (Henderson and Knight, 2012). For instance, activities related to relaxation and happiness often elicit more hedonic well-being among tourists, whereas difficult activities evoke greater eudaimonic well-being (Henderson and Knight, 2012; Ryan and Deci, 2001). Su et al. (2020) confirmed that, compared with relaxing activities, eudaimonic well-being was higher during challenging tourism activities. Experiencing local food is a leisurely activity; however, little is known about how trying local food influences one’s hedonic well-being and eudaimonic well-being during tourism experiences.

A Chinese proverb states “Bread is the stall of life.” Food, as an indispensable part of the tourism experience (Hjalager and Richards, 2002), is a focus of promotion and marketing in many destinations. Studies have shown that the food experience carries both functional value and emotional value (Lai et al., 2021), each of which can exert notable impacts on tourists’ satisfaction and memory. These effects can subsequently influence tourists’ intentions to share electronic word of mouth. However, the role of the social value of food experiences has been largely ignored. Williams et al. (2015) identified social interaction between family members as an important component of food festival participation. It is therefore imperative to further assess the impact of the social value of perceived value on tourists’ emotional tendencies and behavioral intentions.

In light of the aforementioned ambiguities, this study seeks to explore how tourists’ perceived value of the food experience and well-being affect loyalty. In addition, we examine the mediating roles that hedonic well-being and eudaimonic well-being play between tourists’ perceived value and loyalty. Our work is guided by three research questions: (1) How does tourists’ perceived value relate to their well-being after experiencing local food? (2) How does tourists’ well-being affect their loyalty? (3) How do tourists’ perceived functional value, emotional value, and social value affect loyalty through hedonic well-being and eudaimonic well-being? To answer these questions, we construct a conceptual framework connecting the above elements and present an empirical study based on the framework. The proposed model is tested in Guangzhou, China, the home of Guangfu food. Our findings expand academic understanding of the formation mechanism of tourists’ loyalty and clarify the relationship between tourists’ local food experiences and well-being. Results thus inform tourism destination marketing and management.

Literature review and hypothesis development

Food in tourism

Two concepts must be distinguished when studying food and tourism, namely food tourism and food consumption as part of the tourism experience (Hall and Sharples, 2003). Hall and Sharples (2003) cautioned against confusing these notions. Food tourism reflects travel whose primary purpose is to enjoy cuisine. In particular, Hall and Mitchell (2000) specified food tourism as visiting food exhibitions, food festivals, restaurants, and other venues where food tasting and related experiences are the main foci of a trip. Both gastronomy tourism and culinary tourism are synonymous with food tourism (Kivela and Crotts, 2006; Long, 2004). By contrast, when considering food consumption as part of the tourism experience, food embodies a secondary or lower motivation (Okumus et al., 2007); that is, food may not be tourists’ primary motivation for visiting a destination but is nevertheless a core aspect of the tourism experience. This study mainly considers the impacts of food experiences as part of destination experiences, focusing on the latter conceptualization.

Quan and Wang (2004) pointed out that despite a growing body of work on the tourism experience, scholars have largely neglected the effects of eating, sleeping, and transportation on the consumer experience and peak touristic experiences. The products of tourist destinations consist of myriad tangible and intangible goods or services, with food being one of the most critical elements (Okumus et al., 2007). Quan and Wang (2004) also noted that food can function as both a supportive consumer experience and a peak touristic experience in the travel process. Therefore, exploring food’s effects on tourists’ future behavioral intentions can reveal the role of food in a destination’s overall appeal—above and beyond gourmet tourists.

Perceived value theory

The concept of perceived value is derived from consumer behavior theory (Rasoolimanesh et al., 2016). This theory has been introduced in tourism research as well (Sánchez et al., 2006). For instance, Bajs (2015) and Ryu et al. (2012) identified the impacts of perceived value on consumers’ satisfaction and behavioral intentions. Due to the applicability of perceived value to multiple disciplines and topics (Lee et al., 2007), debate persists around which features constitute this construct. Sheth et al. (1991) pointed out that consumer perceived value includes functional, emotional, social, epistemic, and conditional dimensions. Sweeney and Soutar (2001) discovered that, in terms of retail consumption, consumer perceived value covers emotional, social, quality/performance, and price/value for money dimensions. Lai et al. (2021) and Song et al. (2015) described perceived value as involving functional value and emotional value in the contexts of temple stays and culinary tourism. According to the theory of consumption value, Choe and Kim (2018) highlighted the relationships among tourists’ local food consumption values, attitudes, food destination image, and behavioral intentions. The authors defined food consumption value as comprising functional value, emotional value, social value, and epistemic value. Dimensions’ respective values can be subdivided into additional types, such as health value, taste/quality value, price value, prestige value, and interaction value. The current study is grounded in work by Choe and Kim (2018); Lai et al. (2021), and Rasoolimanesh et al. (2016). We therefore distinguish perceived value on the bases of emotional value, functional value, and social value.

First, functional value has been widely confirmed as the prime factor influencing consumers’ choices (Sheth et al., 1991; Song et al., 2015). This type of value refers to consumers’ rational and economic evaluations of a product and the perceived utility obtained from its physical performance (i.e. the product’s ability to fulfill its intended function) (Carlson et al., 2019; Orth et al., 2004; Perrea et al., 2015). Researchers often use expressions such as “reasonably priced” and “worth the money” to indicate functional value (Lai et al., 2021; Song et al., 2015). Second, emotional value, as a social-psychological dimension (Williams and Soutar, 2009), relates to tourists’ affective states (e.g. pleasant, excited, enjoyable) (Sánchez et al., 2006; Sheth et al., 1991; Sweeney and Soutar, 2001). This dimension is critical to understanding tourists’ behavioral intentions in a destination. Third, social value reflects users’ image which consumers wish to mirror. More specifically, when consumers select products, they may consider whether the chosen products align with their own social image among friends and colleagues (Choe and Kim, 2018). Social value is also conveyed through communication between individuals and their companions during the travel process (Choe and Kim, 2018; Kim et al., 2009). Goolaup and Mossberg (2017) explained that for tourists, interacting with friends and family while indulging in delicious food in its natural environment represents an important aspect of the holiday experience.

Well-being theory

The idea of well-being can be traced back to ancient Greece (Ryan and Deci, 2001). Because of its invisibility, complexity, and versatility, well-being continues to be examined and measured across philosophy, sociology, psychology, and other fields (Carlisle et al., 2009; Jayawickreme et al., 2012). In other words, the concept of well-being is inherently interdisciplinary. However, most relevant work has focused on the hedonic aspect of well-being, such as subjective well-being (Gilbert and Abdullah, 2004). Subjective well-being captures people’s long-term positive emotions or mental states (Haybron, 2000), which can be assessed in terms of positive and negative emotions; the eudaimonic aspect of well-being (i.e. the meaning-related element) has been given less attention (Su et al., 2020).

Actually, well-being consists of hedonic and eudaimonic dimensions (Lee and Jeong, 2020; Rahmani et al., 2018; Ryan and Deci, 2001; Smith and Diekmann, 2017), which are at once overlapping and distinct (Rahmani et al., 2018; Ryan and Deci, 2001). The notion of hedonia came from Aristippus, who believed that people should seek happiness and avoid pain as much as possible (Smith and Diekmann, 2017). Hedonia, as a pleasant aspect of well-being, is also tied to tourists’ emotions (Rahmani et al., 2018); it features pleasure, fun, enjoyment, and happiness (amid few negative emotions) and life satisfaction (Rahmani et al., 2018; Ryan and Deci, 2001). Scholars have also regarded comfort, such as relaxation and ease, as a hedonic dimension (Huta and Ryan, 2010). Aristotle first conceived of eudaimonia—he believed that the realization of human potential and growth was the ultimate life pursuit. Eudaimonia is hence defined as the meaning-related aspect of well-being, namely the degree to which a person can fully function and thrive (Ryan and Deci, 2001; Smith and Diekmann, 2017; Su et al., 2020). In other words, eudaimonia is associated with personal growth, self-development, and self-realization (Cloninger, 2004). To date, however, this concept has rarely been applied to the tourism experience (Knobloch et al., 2017).

Relationship between perceived value and well-being

Although researchers have addressed the relationship between the tourism experience and well-being (Rahmani et al., 2018; Smith and Diekmann, 2017), few studies have investigated the impacts of destination-based food experiences on tourists’ well-being (Pourfakhimi et al., 2021). As exceptions, through a survey of Finnish tourists, Björk and Räisänen (2017) underscored the critical role of food experiences in holiday well-being. Pourfakhimi et al. (2021) later found that authentic food experiences contribute to tourists’ subjective well-being.

Studies have further shown that food-based experiences are related to sensory pleasure, arousal, and indulgence (Pourfakhimi et al., 2021). Such experiences can trigger a sense of happiness, satisfaction, desire, and other positive emotions (Desmet and Schifferstein, 2008), highlighting these experiences’ effects on hedonic aspects of well-being. Tourists may become excited when tasting local cuisine, potentially because the food directly stimulates their senses (Mak et al., 2012). Destination-based food experiences are also related to the eudaimonic aspect of well-being (Pourfakhimi et al., 2021). Tsai (2016) noted that tourists can establish new social relations and strengthen social ties by consuming local food. For some tourists, experiencing local cuisine represents an opportunity to connect with others or family members and is conducive to self-improvement and self-satisfaction (Kim et al., 2009). We therefore propose the following hypotheses:

H1: Food-related emotional value has a positive effect on (a) hedonic well-being and (b) eudaimonic well-being.

H2: Food-related functional value has a positive effect on (a) hedonic well-being and (b) eudaimonic well-being.

H3: Food-related social value has a positive effect on (a) hedonic well-being and (b) eudaimonic well-being.

Relationship between well-being and loyalty

A few empirical studies have revealed a significant association between travelers’ well-being and behavioral intentions. Lin (2014) indicated that food-related experiences can affect hot spring tourists’ psychological well-being and willingness to revisit the destination. Kim et al. (2015) examined Korean hikers’ subjective well-being and found that it significantly affected these tourists’ revisit intentions. Reitsamer and Brunner-Sperdin (2017) similarly suggested that travelers’ well-being had a significant positive impact on their revisit intentions and word-of-mouth recommendations. Vada et al. (2019) research on Australian residents demonstrated that hedonic well-being and eudaimonic well-being each significantly influenced tourists’ behavioral intentions. Consistent with the above discussion, the following hypotheses are put forth:

H4: Hedonic well-being has a positive effect on tourists’ loyalty.

H5: Eudaimonic well-being has a positive effect on tourists’ loyalty.

This study also considers the impact mechanism of food’s perceived value on tourists’ loyalty; that is, food’s perceived value can presumably indirectly affect tourists’ loyalty through well-being. The following hypotheses are thus proposed, and Figure 1 illustrates the conceptual model guiding this study:

H6: Food-related emotional value indirectly affects tourists’ loyalty through the mediating effects of (a) hedonic well-being and (b) eudaimonic well-being.

H7: Food-related functional value indirectly affects tourists’ loyalty through the mediating effects of (a) hedonic well-being and (b) eudaimonic well-being.

H8: Food-related social value indirectly affects tourists’ loyalty through the mediating effects of (a) hedonic well-being and (b) eudaimonic well-being.

Figure 1.

Research conceptual model.

Research method

Research site

Guangzhou, a city in southern China, is the capital of Guangdong Province. As one of the most famous cities in modern China, Guangzhou has a profound history and a unique food culture brand. Cantonese specialties (e.g. dim sum, sliced suckling pig, and burn goose) exemplify Guangzhou’s food culture. This culinary style also represents one of the four major cuisines in China owing to its diverse use of ingredients and unique sensory experience. The Guangzhou Renowned Dishes and Delicacies Expo in 1956 featured more than 5447 dishes along with 815 dim sum platters and hundreds of snacks. This study therefore focused on Guangzhou to examine the impact of food’s perceived value on tourists’ loyalty. Figure 2 depicts several classic Cantonese dishes.

Figure 2.

Classic cantonese food (pictures obtained online).

Measurement instrument

Data for this study were collected via a two-part questionnaire. Items in the first section were scored on a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). Thirteen items related to food’s perceived value were adapted from earlier work (Choe and Kim, 2018; Lai et al., 2021; Song et al., 2015). To assess hedonic and eudaimonic well-being, eight items were adapted from Huta and Ryan (2010) to fit the study context. Two items regarding tourist loyalty (“If there is a chance, I will come back to Guangzhou to taste the food” and “If there is a chance, I would like to recommend my friends and relatives visit Guangzhou to taste the food”) were added to the loyalty scale (Chi and Qu, 2008) to reflect our research setting. The second part of the questionnaire requested respondents’ demographic information, including gender, age, educational background, and monthly income.

To evaluate the scale’s content validity, three tourism scholars and five postgraduate students majoring in tourism management were asked to review the measurement instrument and provide feedback on whether each item was concise, clear, and easy to understand. Because the target survey respondents were Chinese tourists, all items in the formal questionnaire were presented in Chinese.

Data collection

Data were gathered via nonprobability convenience sampling. A scholar who has published extensive research involving structural equation modeling and who possesses expertise in on-site questionnaire surveys was invited to provide the four interviewers systematic training on data collection. Questionnaires were distributed in famous scenic spots and restaurants in Guangzhou that tourists visit frequently.

At the start of the questionnaire, respondents were asked to answer two questions: “1. Are you a visitor?” and “2. Have you tried Guangzhou food on this trip?” (Lai et al., 2021). If respondents answered “yes” to both, then they were allowed to complete the questionnaire; otherwise, the survey ended. We also explained the survey’s purpose to all respondents to ensure they could confidently complete it, and we clarified items if respondents had questions.

A total of 600 questionnaires were obtained. After filtering, 103 questionnaires were excluded due to incompleteness or multivariate outliers; 497 (82.8%) questionnaires were valid. This sample size exceeds the minimum requirement for structural equation modeling (SEM) (Bentler and Chou, 1987).

Results

Respondents’ demographic characteristics

As shown in Table 1, 54.1% of the respondents were women and 45.9% were men. In terms of age, 1.8% of respondents were under 18 years old, 51.1% were 18–30, 34.2% were 31–40, 12.1% were 41–60, and 0.8% were over 60. Most May Day holiday tourists work or go to school; our sample therefore largely consisted of young and middle-aged people. In terms of education, 8.2% of respondents had completed high school or less, 15.3% had completed junior college, 63% held a bachelor’s degree, and 13.5% held a master’s degree or higher. As there were many well-known restaurants on social media near the location where questionnaires were distributed, college students accounted for a large proportion of the sample. Regarding income, 24.5% of respondents reported earning RMB ¥3001–6000 (about GBP £346–690) per month, while 30.4% earned a monthly income of RMB ¥6001–10,000 (about GBP £691–1150); thus, the sample comprised mainly middle-income respondents.

Table 1.

Respondents’ demographic characteristics.

Variables	Items	Frequency	Percent
Gender	Male	228	45.9%
Gender	Female	269	54.1%
Age	Under 18	9	1.8%
	18–30	254	51.1%
	31–40	170	34.2%
	41–60	60	12.1%
	Over 60	4	0.8%
Education	High school and below	41	8.2%
	Junior college	76	15.3%
	Bachelor’s degree	313	63%
	Master’s degree and over	67	13.5%
Monthly income RMB (GBP)	Under ¥1000 (under approximately £115)	48	9.7%
	¥1000–3000 (approximately £115–345)	67	13.5%
	¥3001–6000 (approximately £346–690)	122	24.5%
	¥6001–10,000 (approximately £691–1150)	151	30.4%
	Over ¥10,000 (over approximately £1150)	109	21.9%

Measurement model

We used SmartPLS 3.3 based on the partial least squares (PLS) algorithm to assess the model. PLS is appropriate for analyzing SEM and for testing hypothesized relationships (Chin, 1998). In addition, the PLS method includes minimal requirements for measurement scales, sample size, and residual distributions (Liu et al., 2018).

First, we performed exploratory factor analysis to test the measurement scale’s unidimensionality (Gefen and Straub, 2005). Results showed a Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) value of 0.951, significant at the 0.000 level; thus, the scale was suitable for factor analysis. Factor analysis revealed six fixed factors (KMO: 0.948; accumulative variance: 72.58%) after excluding two items (“HW1: Eating Guangzhou food relieves my tension.” and “EW4: Eating Guangzhou food means a lot to me.”).

Next, we tested the scale’s internal consistency, indicator reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity. Table 2 lists factor loadings for all items along with the Cronbach’s alpha, composite reliability (CR), and average variance extracted (AVE) for each construct. As shown in Table 2, factor loadings ranged from 0.785 to 0.913, all greater than 0.7 (Hair et al., 2011). The Cronbach’s alpha values for all constructs were between 0.816 and 0.878, surpassing the desired value of 0.8. All CR values exceeded 0.8 as well (Henseler et al., 2009; Nunnally and Bernstein, 1994). The instrument thus displayed high internal consistency and indicator reliability among constructs. In addition, the AVE values of all constructs ranged from 0.647 to 0.803, higher than the threshold of 0.5 (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). The measures of all constructs therefore demonstrated high convergent validity.

Table 2.

Reliability and convergent validity.

Variables	Factor loading	Cronbach’s alpha	CR	AVE
Emotional value (EV)		0.857	0.903	0.700
EV1: Eating Guangzhou food makes me feel happy.	0.860
EV2: Eating Guangzhou food changes my mood positively.	0.821
EV3: I’m fascinated by Guangzhou food.	0.833
EV4: I’m eager to eat more Guangzhou food.	0.830
Functional value (FV)		0.865	0.908	0.712
FV1: Guangzhou food is reasonably priced.	0.853
FV2: Guangzhou food is worth the money paid.	0.840
FV3: Guangzhou food offers value for money.	0.864
FV4: Compared with other tourism activities, eating Guangzhou food has a high economic value.	0.816
Social value (SV)		0.863	0.901	0.647
SV1: Eating Guangzhou food gives me a chance to show off my Guangzhou food experiences to others.	0.823
SV2: It’s worth showing pictures of my Guangzhou food experiences to others.	0.789
SV3: Eating Guangzhou food gives me more attention.	0.819
SV4: My friendship or kinship with my travel companion has increased while eating Guangzhou food together.	0.785
SV5: Eating Guangzhou food helps me to interact with the people I travel with.	0.804
Hedonic well-being (HW)		0.816	0.891	0.731
HW2: Eating Guangzhou food is fun.	0.842
HW3: I enjoy eating Guangzhou food.	0.889
HW4: Eating Guangzhou food makes me feel relaxed.	0.833
Eudaimonic well-being (EW)		0.878	0.925	0.803
EW1: Eating Guangzhou food gives me a sense of achievement.	0.881
EW2: Eating Guangzhou food inspires my thinking.	0.895
EW3: Eating Guangzhou food makes me realize my true self.	0.913
Tourists’ loyalty (TL)		0.869	0.911	0.719
TL1: If there is a chance, I will come back to Guangzhou to visit.	0.836
TL2: If there is a chance, I will come back to Guangzhou to taste the food.	0.819
TL3: If there is a chance, I would like to recommend that my friends and relatives travel to Guangzhou.	0.852
TL4: If there is a chance, I would like to recommend that my friends and relatives visit Guangzhou to taste the food.	0.883

The Fornell–Larcker criterion and heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) ratio of correlations were used to test the measurement model’s discriminant validity. As displayed in Table 3, the square root of the AVE of each dimension was greater than its correlation coefficient with other dimensions (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). All HTMT values for correlations were less than 0.85 as shown in Table 4 (Henseler et al., 2015). The scale accordingly exhibited sufficient discriminant validity.

Table 3.

Fornell–Larcker criterion.

	AVE	EV	EW	FV	HW	SV	TL
EV	0.700	0.837
EW	0.803	0.498	0.896
FV	0.712	0.532	0.611	0.844
HW	0.731	0.689	0.523	0.626	0.855
SV	0.647	0.539	0.663	0.596	0.588	0.804
TL	0.719	0.586	0.498	0.564	0.695	0.598	0.848

Table 4.

HTMT ratio of correlations.

	EV	EW	FV	HW	SV
EV
EW	0.564
FV	0.614	0.700
HW	0.822	0.617	0.745
SV	0.623	0.756	0.687	0.703
TL	0.677	0.569	0.650	0.823	0.692

Items on the diagonal represent the square roots of AVE values; off-diagonal elements are correlation estimates.

To ensure the validity of our research conclusions, we conducted a full collinearity assessment to test for common method variance. Results returned variance inflation factor values between 1.717 and 2.898, all less than 5, indicating that common method variance did not severely affect the validity of our data (Kock, 2015; Kock and Lynn, 2012).

Structural model and hypothesis testing

A bootstrapping procedure was used to test the structural model. Based on conventional practice, 5000 iterations were run, and the significance level of p < 0.05 was taken as the standard for path testing. The PLS-SEM results are reported in Table 5 and depicted in Figure 3.

Figure 3.

Results of structural model.

Table 5.

Results of hypothesis testing.

Hypothesis	Path	Path coefficient (β)	t-value	p-value	Result
H1a	EV → HW	0.440	8.902	***	Supported
H1b	EV → EW	0.110	2.555	0.011*	Supported
H2a	FV → HW	0.283	6.526	***	Supported
H2b	FV → EW	0.298	5.956	***	Supported
H3a	SV → HW	0.183	3.712	***	Supported
H3b	SV → EW	0.426	8.771	***	Supported
H4	HW → TL	0.597	13.245	***	Supported
H5	EW → TL	0.186	4.705	***	Supported

***p < 0.001, *p < 0.05.

As presented in Table 5, emotional value had a positive effect on hedonic well-being (β = 0.440, p < 0.001) and eudaimonic well-being (β = 0.110, p < 0.05), lending support to H1a and H1b. Functional value had a positive impact on hedonic well-being (β = 0.283, p < 0.001) and eudaimonic well-being (β = 0.298, p < 0.001); as such, H2a and H2b were accepted. Social value exerted a positive effect on hedonic well-being (β = 0.183, p < 0.001) and eudaimonic well-being (β = 0.426, p < 0.001), confirming H3a and H3b. Both hedonic well-being and eudaimonic well-being positively affected tourists’ loyalty (β_hedonic = 0.597, p < 0.001; β_eudaimonic = 0.186, p < 0.001). H4 and H5 were accordingly supported. Collectively, our findings supported H1a–H5. The R² values of hedonic well-being, eudaimonic well-being, and tourists’ loyalty (Figure 3) also exceeded 0.50, reflecting a moderate value (Hair et al., 2011).

Interestingly, tourists’ positive food experiences were found to affect well-being, whether hedonic or eudaimonic. Emotional value seemed to have the greatest impact on hedonic well-being (β = 0.440) and the weakest effect on eudaimonic well-being (β = 0.110). This gap may have emerged because hedonic well-being emphasizes happiness-related aspects (Su et al., 2020). The appearance, smell, and taste of Guangzhou food can directly stimulate tourists’ senses, triggering happiness and enjoyment (Mak et al., 2012) and mainly shaping their hedonic well-being rather than relatively delayed eudaimonic well-being related to self-development, self-satisfaction, and meaning. The emotional value of food therefore represents the main factor in hedonic well-being. In addition, functional value moderately affected hedonic well-being (β = 0.283) and eudaimonic well-being (β = 0.298) in this study. This impact may have arisen from tourists’ closer attention to the pleasure evoked by food (Lai et al., 2021) and the time spent with travel companions than to the money they paid. Social value had the strongest effect on eudaimonic well-being (β = 0.426) (in opposition to emotional value) whereas its impact on hedonic well-being (β = 0.183) was weak. Compared with the sensory experience that food brings to tourists, travelers can gain attention from others by sharing their food experiences in a destination. Their relationships with family and friends thus become more tightly knit, and their sense of self-growth strengthens (Ryff, 2014; Su et al., 2020).

Mediating effect test

In this study, the non-parametric bootstrap method with bias-corrected intervals was used to test the mediating effect. Bootstrap sample extraction was set to 5000 with a confidence interval under 95%. Hypothesis testing results appear in Table 6. Emotional value (β = 0.283, p < 0.001), functional value (β = 0.225, p < 0.001), and social value (β = 0.188, p < 0.001) each indirectly affected tourists’ loyalty through well-being, confirming H6–H8. Specific indirect effect tests (Table 6) further showed that H6a–H8b were supported.

Table 6.

Results of mediating effect.

Hypothesis	Path	Path coefficient (β)	t-value	p-value	Result
Total indirect effect
H6	EV→TL	0.283	7.789	***	Supported
H7	FV→TL	0.225	7.338	***	Supported
H8	SV→TL	0.188	5.388	***	Supported
Specific indirect effect
H6a	EV→HW→TL	0.263	7.176	***	Supported
H6b	EV→EW→TL	0.020	2.171	0.030*	Supported
H7a	FV→HW→TL	0.169	5.712	***	Supported
H7b	FV→EW→TL	0.055	3.879	***	Supported
H8a	SV→HW→TL	0.109	3.546	***	Supported
H8b	SV→EW→TL	0.079	3.800	***	Supported

Our findings clarify the roles of two dimensions of well-being: both hedonic and eudaimonic well-being can positively influence tourists’ loyalty. This outcome is inconsistent with that of Vada et al. (2019): in a survey of 430 people with recent tourism experience, Vada et al. (2019) found that hedonic well-being had a significant impact on tourists’ loyalty while eudaimonic well-being exerted no such effect. In addition, the mediating role of hedonic well-being between three dimensions of food’s perceived value and tourists’ loyalty was greater than that of eudaimonic well-being.

Discussion and conclusion

In this study, we proposed a conceptual model integrating perceived value theory, well-being theory, and loyalty. Taking Guangzhou as a case, we tested this model and examined relationships among tourists’ perceived value, well-being, and loyalty. The conceptual model was strongly supported by empirical evidence. Our findings point to several notable conclusions. First, the functional value, emotional value, and social value of food each significantly affect hedonic well-being and eudaimonic well-being, with emotional value having the strongest impact on hedonic well-being and the weakest impact on eudaimonic well-being. In addition, social value has the greatest influence on eudaimonic well-being. Second, both hedonic well-being and eudaimonic well-being significantly affect tourists’ loyalty. Third, hedonic well-being and eudaimonic well-being play essential mediating roles between the perceived value of food and tourists’ loyalty. These patterns address the three research questions posed initially.

When tourists taste local food while traveling, their food experiences can evoke perceived emotional, functional, and social value. These three perceived values in turn affect tourists’ perceptions of hedonic well-being and eudaimonic well-being and further influence their destination loyalty. We identified the path of the impact of food’s perceived value on tourists’ loyalty, namely “food’s perceived value → hedonic well-being and eudaimonic well-being → tourists’ loyalty.” In essence, the perceived value brought by food is an important influencing factor in tourists’ loyalty, and the two dimensions of well-being play key mediating roles between food’s perceived value and tourists’ loyalty. By contrast, earlier studies (Chen et al., 2013; Gilbert and Abdullah, 2004) only considered the hedonic aspect of well-being to the neglect of eudaimonic characteristics. This one-sided view resulted in a somewhat limited understanding of the impact of the tourism experience on tourists’ well-being. We therefore incorporated the roles of hedonic and eudaimonic well-being into the relationship between perceived value and tourists’ loyalty. In general, our empirical findings from Guangzhou have important theoretical and practical implications for the tourism literature, Guangzhou’s tourism industry, and destinations with a tourism environment similar to that in Guangzhou.

Theoretical implications

Our results enrich the extant literature in three ways. First of all, to the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to examine whether and how the perceived value of tourists’ food experiences influences two aspects of well-being (i.e. hedonic and eudaimonic) and in turn affects loyalty. Researchers have identified factors that can shape tourists’ loyalty, such as satisfaction (Yoon and Uysal, 2005), destination image (Chi and Qu, 2008), place attachment (Prayag and Ryan, 2012), and perceived quality (Žabkar et al., 2010). Through the proposed conceptual model, our work expands the range of influencing factors related to tourists’ loyalty and enriches the literature on the formation mechanism of loyalty.

Second, we have applied perceived value theory to food experiences. We specifically adopted a multi-dimensional perceived value method to show that the food experience can offer tourists functional and emotional value (Lai et al., 2021) as well as social value (Choe and Kim, 2018). This study reveals that tourists’ well-being and loyalty depend on the functional, emotional, and social aspects of perceived value. Of note, social value is paramount to eudaimonic well-being: when tourists enjoy delicious food in a destination, they experience delight while becoming more connected with their companions (Williams et al., 2015) – whether family, friends, or lovers.

Third, we enlarge the application of well-being theory in the food experience. This study took the perceived value of the food experience as a predictor of well-being and explored the mediating roles of hedonic well-being and eudaimonic well-being between perceived value and loyalty. These aspects enhance the potential contribution of the tourism experience to tourists’ well-being. In addition, we examined influencing factors of well-being by combining hedonic and eudaimonic well-being, partly rectifying the general lack of eudaimonic research in tourism. In particular, our finding that social value can significantly affect tourists’ eudaimonic well-being confirms that even relaxing activities can trigger strong eudaimonic well-being among travelers. This discovery reinforces work by Su et al. (2020) to some extent.

Finally, the current research provides a clearer picture of the impact mechanism of perceived value induced by the food experience on tourists’ destination loyalty. Earlier literature did not document the impact path of the perceived value of the food experience on tourists’ loyalty; our work provides evidence of this mechanism.

Practical implications

Practically, the results of this study provide guidance around promoting food as a vital tourism resource. Local government departments, destination marketing organizations, catering industry operators, and other stakeholders should acknowledge food’s utility as a means of attracting tourists, especially in places famous for their unique dishes and food culture. In other words, destination stakeholders should devise marketing strategies to inspire more tourists to taste local cuisine.

First, to increase tourists’ perceptions of emotional value and two types of well-being, dining establishments should strive to create a comfortable and relaxed atmosphere for guests featuring comfortable seating, clean tablecloths, exquisite tableware, soothing music (e.g. classical Cantonese songs), and friendly service staff. In Guangzhou, for geographical reasons, many local service personnel are more fluent in Cantonese than Mandarin. Servers may therefore need to explain dishes more clearly and provide tourists patient service in Mandarin. Restaurant operators should also aim to offer guests food with an exquisite appearance, appealing smell, and excellent taste to promote tourists’ revisit and recommendation intentions. In addition to providing tourists with the above basic conditions, catering operators should add more entertaining elements for tourists in the process of enjoying local food (Lai et al., 2021). For example, tourists can enjoy Guangzhou food while watching the famous bridge segments of Cantonese Opera performed by Cantonese Opera actors, such as Chang Ping Princess and The Legend of Purple Hairpin. Local singers can also be invited to cover classic Cantonese songs during tourists’ meals, such as songs by the Hong Kong rock band Beyond. More interestingly, operators can even invite diners to perform on the stage. These experiences will satisfy tourists’ taste buds while providing visual and auditory stimulation.

Second, regarding functional value, restaurant operators should strive to provide food experiences with high economic value. Establishments can allow diners to observe food production as they enjoy a meal. For instance, when trying Chaoshan beef hotpot, tourists can watch how chefs slice different parts of the cow; when tasting roasted suckling pig, tourists can see the chef bake one in the open kitchen. The service staff can also explain the intricacies of preparing local dishes, such as baking times and methods, food material selection, and seasonings. Moreover, waiters can explain or demonstrate the most authentic way of eating the food for tourists before or during the meal. Restaurants can also use multimedia devices to show guests the origins and development of the cuisine along with interesting food-related stories; this way, tourists can not only enjoy the local food but also learn about the area’s unique food culture, which is conducive to improving tourists’ well-being. Moreover, local tourism management departments can hold food festivals (e.g. Guangfu Intangible Cultural Heritage Food Show) to showcase local dishes. Cultural heritage inheritors could even be invited to prepare delicacies with a long history and complicated production process on-site that tourists cannot necessarily order in restaurants. Visitors could be invited to participate in the food production process as well.

Third, local stakeholders should continue to focus on tourists’ perceptions of social value. Restaurant operators must therefore provide sufficient space for guests traveling with family and friends: establishments should include quiet areas for eating and conversation, such as by opening rooms of different sizes and by separating tables with privacy screens if the dining space is crowded. Local governments and marketing organizations could also coordinate food-making activities in which tourists participate with their peers. For instance, parents, children, or spouses could be invited to engage in food production; doing so would enable tourists to strengthen their relationships while preparing dishes. Such collaboration can forge positive travel memories that will linger upon tourists’ return home. In sum, this study provides several actionable recommendations to accelerate destinations’ post-pandemic recovery.

Limitations and further studies

Although the potential contributions of this research are noteworthy, several limitations leave room for future work. First, data were collected within a limited period from tourists during travel. To address this limitation, future work should include longitudinal observations to test the proposed model. For example, researchers can continue to monitor how the strength of relationships among variables changes, such as within a day, week, or month after travel (Su et al., 2020). Second, the validity of the second filtering question presented at the start of the questionnaire should be further considered; this question could elicit misunderstanding among respondents. For instance, respondents may not take so-called “Guangzhou food” to mean local and traditional food that exemplifies the characteristics of Guangzhou. Additionally, respondents may not possess the requisite knowledge to judge which foods are considered authentic local dishes in Guangzhou. Subsequent studies could show respondents photos of local delicacies before proceeding to the questionnaire. Respondents could also be asked to report which food(s) they have eaten to ensure more accurate questionnaire answers. Third, although questionnaires were distributed using systematic sampling in different locations, most respondents were undergraduates. Future research should balance respondents’ age and education level as much as possible. Finally, future research can further test the direct impact of perceived value on tourists’ loyalty and the effects of other dimensions of perceived value on well-being and loyalty, such as health value, epistemic value, and so on (Choe and Kim, 2018).

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the Jinan University’s Scientific Research Creativeness Cultivation Project for Outstanding Undergraduates Recommended for Postgraduate Study, Jinan University Shenzhen Campus Funding Program, (grant number 50505019, JNSZQH2105).

ORCID iDs

Shaopeng Liu

Shiying Li

References

Bajs

(2015) Tourist perceived value, relationship to satisfaction, and behavioral intentions: The example of the Croatian tourist destination dubrovnik. Journal of Travel Research 54(1): 122–134.

Bentler

Chou

C-P

(1987) Practical issues in structural modeling. Sociological Methods and Research 16(1): 78–117.

Björk

Kauppinen-Räisänen

(2017) A destination’s gastronomy as a means for holiday well-being. British Food Journal 119(7): 1578–1591.

Carlisle

Henderson

Hanlon

(2009) ‘Wellbeing’: A collateral casualty of modernity? Social Science & Medicine 69(10): 1556–1560.

Carlson

Rahman

Taylor

, et al. (2019) Feel the VIBE: Examining value-in-the-brand-page-experience and its impact on satisfaction and customer engagement behaviours in mobile social media. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 46: 149–162.

Chen

Lehto

Cai

(2013) Vacation and well-being: A study of Chinese tourists. Annals of Tourism Research 42: 284–310.

Chi

CG-Q

(2008) Examining the structural relationships of destination image, tourist satisfaction and destination loyalty: An integrated approach. Tourism Management 29(4): 624–636.

Chin

(1998) The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Modern Methods for Business Research 295(2): 295–336.

Choe

JYJ

Kim

(2018) Effects of tourists’ local food consumption value on attitude, food destination image, and behavioral intention. International Journal of Hospitality Management 71: 1–10.

10.

Cloninger

(2004) Feeling Good: The Science of Well-Being. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

11.

Desmet

PMA

Schifferstein

HNJ

(2008) Sources of positive and negative emotions in food experience. Appetite 50(2-3): 290–301.

12.

Dolnicar

Yanamandram

Cliff

(2012) The contribution of vacations to quality of life. Annals of Tourism Research 39(1): 59–83.

13.

Fornell

Larcker

(1981) Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research 18: 382–388.

14.

Gefen

Straub

(2005) A practical guide to factorial validity using PLS-graph: Tutorial and annotated example. Communications of the Association for Information Systems 16: 91–109.

15.

Gilbert

Abdullah

(2004) Holidaytaking and the sense of well-being. Annals of Tourism Research 31(1): 103–121.

16.

Goolaup

Mossberg

(2017) Exploring the concept of extraordinary related to food tourists’ nature-based experience. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism 17(1): 27–43.

17.

Hair

Ringle

Sarstedt

(2011) PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 19(2): 139–152.

18.

Hall

Mitchell

(2000) "We are what we eat": Food, tourism, and globalization and localisation of cuisine. Tourism Culture & Communication 2(1): 29–37.

19.

Hall

Sharples

(2003) The Consumption of Experiences or the Experience of Consumption? An introduction to the Tourism of Taste. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

20.

Haybron

(2000) Two philosophical problems in the study of happiness. Journal of Happiness Studies 1: 207–225.

21.

Henderson

Knight

(2012) Integrating the hedonic and eudaimonic perspectives to more comprehensively understand wellbeing and pathways to wellbeing. International Journal of Wellbeing 2(3): 196–221.

22.

Henseler

Ringle

Sarstedt

(2015) A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 43: 115–135.

23.

Henseler

Ringle

Sinkovics

(2009) The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. Advances in International Marketing 20: 277–319.

24.

Hjalager

Richards

(2002) Tourism and Gastronomy. London: Routledge.

25.

Huta

Ryan

(2010) Pursuing pleasure or virtue: The differential and overlapping well-being benefits of hedonic and eudaimonic motives. Journal of Happiness Studies 11: 735–762.

26.

Jayawickreme

Forgeard

MJC

Seligman

MEP

(2012) The engine of well-being. Review of General Psychology 16(4): 327–342.

27.

Kim

Lee

Uysal

, et al. (2015) Nature-based tourism: Motivation and subjective well-being. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing 32(sup1): S76–S96.

28.

Kim

Eves

Scarles

(2009) Building a model of local food consumption on trips and holidays: A grounded theory approach. International Journal of Hospitality Management 28(3): 423–431.

29.

Kivela

Crotts

(2006) Tourism and gastronomy: Gastronomy’s influence on how tourists experience a destination. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research 30(3): 354–377.

30.

Knobloch

Robertson

Aitken

(2017) Experience, emotion, and eudaimonia: A consideration of tourist experiences and well-being. Journal of Travel Research 56(5): 651–662.

31.

Kock

(2015) Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment approach. International Journal of e-Collaboration 11(4): 1–10.

32.

Kock

Lynn

(2012) Lateral collinearity and misleading results in variance-based SEM: An illustration and recommendations. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 13(7): 546–580.

33.

Lai

IKW

Liu

(2021) The effects of tourists’ destination culinary experience on electronic word-of-mouth generation intention: The experience economy theory. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research 26(3): 231–244.

34.

Lee

C-K

Yoon

Y-S

Lee

S-K

(2007) Investigating the relationships among perceived value, satisfaction, and recommendations: The case of the Korean DMZ. Tourism Management 28(1): 204–214.

35.

Lee

Jeong

(2020) Beyond the correlation between tourist eudaimonic and hedonic experiences: Necessary condition analysis. Current Issues in Tourism 23(17): 2182–2194.

36.

Lin

C-H

(2014) Effects of cuisine experience, psychological well-being, and self-health perception on the revisit intention of hot springs tourists. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research 38(2): 243–265.

37.

Liu

Huang

(2018) Examining relationships among perceived benefit, tourist experience and satisfaction: The context of intelligent sharing bicycle. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research 23(5): 437–449.

38.

Long

(2004) Culinary Tourism. Lexington, KY: University Press of Kentucky.

39.

Mak

AHN

Lumbers

Eves

(2012) Globalisation and food consumption in tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 39(1): 171–196.

40.

McCabe

Johnson

(2013) The happiness factor in tourism: Subjective well-being and social tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 41: 42–65.

41.

Neal

Sirgy

Uysal

(1999) The role of satisfaction with leisure travel/tourism services and experience in satisfaction with leisure life and overall life. Journal of Business Research 44(3): 153–163.

42.

Nunnally

Bernstein

(1994) Psychometric Theory, 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.

43.

Okumus

McKercher

(2007) Incorporating local and international cuisines in the marketing of tourism destinations: The cases of Hong Kong and Turkey. Tourism Management 28(1): 253–261.

44.

Orth

McDaniel

Shellhammer

, et al. (2004) Promoting brand benefits: The role of consumer psychographics and lifestyle. Journal of Consumer Marketing 21(2): 97–108.

45.

Perrea

Grunert

Krystallis

(2015) Consumer value perceptions of food products from emerging processing technologies: A cross-cultural exploration. Food Quality and Preference 39: 95–108.

46.

Pourfakhimi

Nadim

Prayag

, et al. (2021) The influence of neophobia and enduring food involvement on travelers’ perceptions of wellbeing—evidence from international visitors to Iran. International Journal of Tourism Research 23(2): 178–191.

47.

Prayag

Ryan

(2012) Antecedents of tourists’ loyalty to Mauritius: The role and influence of destination image, place attachment, personal involvement, and satisfaction. Journal of Travel Research 51(3): 342–356.

48.

Quan

Wang

(2004) Towards a structural model of the tourist experience: An illustration from food experiences in tourism. Tourism Management 25(3): 297–305.

49.

Rahmani

Gnoth

Mather

(2018) Hedonic and eudaimonic well-being: A psycholinguistic view. Tourism Management 69: 155–166.

50.

Rasoolimanesh

Dahalan

Jaafar

(2016) Tourists’ perceived value and satisfaction in a community-based homestay in the lenggong valley world heritage site. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 26: 72–81.

51.

Reitsamer

Brunner-Sperdin

(2017) Tourist destination perception and well-being: What makes a destination attractive? Journal of Vacation Marketing 23(1): 55–72.

52.

Ryan

Deci

(2001) On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology 52: 141–166.

53.

Ryff

(2014) Psychological well-being revisited: Advances in the science and practice of eudaimonia. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics 83: 10–28.

54.

Ryu

Lee

H-R

Kim

(2012) The influence of the quality of the physical environment, food, and service on restaurant image, customer perceived value, customer satisfaction, and behavioral intentions. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 24(2): 200–223.

55.

Sánchez

Callarisa

Rodríguez

, et al. (2006) Perceived value of the purchase of a tourism product. Tourism Management 27(3): 394–409.

56.

Sheth

Newman

Gross

(1991) Why we buy what we buy: A theory of consumption values. Journal of Business Research 22(2): 159–170.

57.

Smith

Diekmann

(2017) Tourism and wellbeing. Annals of Tourism Research 66: 1–13.

58.

Song

Lee

C-K

Park

, et al. (2015) The influence of tourist experience on perceived value and satisfaction with temple stays: The experience economy theory. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing 32(4): 401–415.

59.

Tang

Nawijn

(2020) Eudaimonic and hedonic well-being pattern changes: Intensity and activity. Annals of Tourism Research 84: 103008.

60.

Sweeney

Soutar

(2001) Consumer perceived value: The development of a multiple item scale. Journal of Retailing 77(2): 203–220.

61.

Tsai

C-TS

(2016) Memorable tourist experiences and place attachment when consuming local food. International Journal of Tourism Research 18(6): 536–548.

62.

Vada

Prentice

Hsiao

(2019) The role of positive psychology in tourists’ behavioural intentions. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 51: 293–303.

63.

Williams

Germov

Fuller

, et al. (2015) A taste of ethical consumption at a slow food festival. Appetite 91: 321–328.

64.

Williams

Soutar

(2009) Value, satisfaction and behavioral intentions in an adventure tourism context. Annals of Tourism Research 36(3): 413–438.

65.

Yoon

Uysal

(2005) An examination of the effects of motivation and satisfaction on destination loyalty: A structural model. Tourism Management 26(1): 45–56.

66.

Žabkar

Brenčič

Dmitrović

(2010) Modelling perceived quality, visitor satisfaction and behavioural intentions at the destination level. Tourism Management 31(4): 537–546.