See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267212164

Islamic tourism: an empirical examination of

travel motivation and satisfaction in Malaysia

Article in Current Issues in Tourism · October 2014

CITATIONS READS

3 1,353

1 author:

Mohamed Mohamed Battour

Tanta University
39 PUBLICATIONS 335 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Non-muslim perception towards Halal Tourism View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mohamed Mohamed Battour on 05 November 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Islamic Tourism: An Empirical Examination of Travel Motivation and Satisfaction in
Malaysia

Dr. Mohamed Battour 1

Faculty of Commerce, Tanta University, Egypt
Faculty of business and accountancy, University of Malaya, Malaysia
Email: mohamedbator@gmail.com
mbattour@um.edu.my

Prof. Mohd Nazari Ismail

Faculty of Business and Accounting, University of Malaya, Malaysia
50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
E-mail: mdnazari@um.edu.my

Dr. Moustafa Battor

Faculty of Commerce, Tanta University, Egypt
Middlesex University, London
Email: m.battor@yahoo.com

Dr. Muhammad Awais

University Utara Malaysia, Malaysia
Email: awaisbhatti_786@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT

The objectives of this study are to test the relationship between tourism motivations and tourist
satisfaction, and to test how ‘Religion’ moderates the relationship. The variable ‘Religion’ is
represented by the availability of Islamic norms and practices relevant to tourism at the
destination. The results of the Partial Least Square (PLS) indicate that tourism motivations are
significantly and positively related to tourist satisfaction. The results also showed that Religion
significantly moderates the relationship between pull motivation and tourist satisfaction.
However, the moderating effect of Religion on the relationship between push motivation and
tourist satisfaction was not supported.

Key Words: Religion; Islam; satisfaction; motivations; pilgrimage; Malaysia.

1
Please address all correspondence to

1
1. INTRODUCTION

Tourism industries are always searching for a new customer segment. For example, over

the last decade, the tourism industry has witnessed many firms in the industry catering to the

needs of special groups such as elderly tourists, disabled tourists and gay tourists (Weidenfeld,

2006). However, one relatively unexplored segment is the ‘Religiously conscious’ tourist.

Evidence indicates that some tourists feel they have no other choice but to compromise their

religious beliefs in order to enjoy tourism. If this situation is common, then it means there is a

large potential of unsatisfied need in this significant market segment. It is no wonder, therefore,

that some researchers in this field insist that catering to the religious needs of any faith in this

expanding industry is essential (Weidenfeld & Ron, 2008).

Religion is associated with tourism, in terms of consumer (tourist) behaviour and the

supplier (host), as well as the relationship between them (Poria et al., 2003). However, there is

limited research available on this relationship (Howe, 2001; Rinschede, 1992). Furthermore, in

the current competition amongst destination marketers, destination marketing objectives need to

be guided by an investigation of tourist motivation and its interaction with tourist satisfaction

(Devesa et al., 2010; Yoon & Uysal, 2005; Zabkar et al., 2010). The destination marketers

should position and differentiate themselves according to tourist perceptions (Chattalas et al.,

2008). When the appropriate tourists are provided with prior-trip information related to the

current products/services, they could be enabled to identify a destination and may generate

greater satisfaction (Wheeler, 1995).

Muslim customers constitute a global market of approximately 1.82 billion potential customers

(Muslim population worldwide, 2009; WTM, 2007). The potential of this market is also reflected by

2
its rapid growth. In addition, the Muslim market has its special requirements and culture, which

cannot be ignored (Battour et al. 2013;Battour et al., 2012; Battour et al. 2010). Thus, satisfying

the religious needs of Muslim tourists may encourage them to travel to a specific destination.

The prevalence of religious beliefs and values could be an important factor to consider when a

Muslim decides to travel abroad (WTM, 2007). The Muslim tourist may decide not to travel to a

particular destination in the absence of certain Islamic attributes (Battour et al., 2011).

This study attempts to address this problem by empirically testing the relationship between

tourism motivation and overall tourist satisfaction with the availability of religion (Islam) as a

moderating variable. The religion is represented by the availability of Islamic norms and

practices related to tourism at the destination. Moreover, recent years have witnessed a growing

interest in new concepts such as ‘Halal (Islamic) tourism’(Chitakasem, 2007; WTM, 2007, p. 5),

‘Halal hospitality’, ‘Sharia Compliant Hotels’ and ‘Halal friendly travel’(Crescentrating, 2011).

This study contributes to an understanding the real meaning of such terms. Furthermore, this

study addresses Halal issues in the tourism sector, which have not been adequately covered.

2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE HYPOTHESIS

2.1 Tourism motivations and tourist satisfaction

Most discussions in tourism and destination marketing have applied the theory of push-

and-pull motivation when explaining why people travel and select a specific destination.

Researchers generally agree that people travel and select their destinations according to different

push-and-pull motivational factors (Baloglu & Uysal, 1996; Chul Oh et al., 1995; Crompton,

1979; Dann, 1981; Iso-Ahola, 1982; Jang & Cai, 2002; Kim & Lee, 2002; Kozak, 2002;

Mansfeld, 1992; Uysal & Jurowski, 1994; Yoon & Uysal, 2005). The theory assumes that people

3
are first of all pushed by internal desires or emotional factors to travel and then they are pulled

by external or tangible factors (destination attributes). Moreover, it assumes that these two sets of

forces might be both independent and interdependent.

Tourism marketers need to ascertain the motives behind certain types of travel behaviour,

including the selection of a destination and the attributes found in the choice vacation spot of

choice (Yoon & Uysal, 2005). According to Uysal et al. (2008), destination is a consumer

product and tourists are consumers who buy diverse tourism products and services. For effective

destination marketing, marketers must comprehend what motivates individuals to travel and what

attributes are essential for an individual to travel to a destination. If destination marketers have a

clear awareness of why their products are in demand for a given market segment or group, they

will be able to tailor their products to suit customer needs using the right advertising and sales

messages.

The satisfaction level of tourists is significantly connected to their travel needs.

Therefore, it is important to obtain a clear picture of motivation, which responds to different

levels of satisfaction (Qu & Ping, 1999). Undoubtedly, satisfaction is a crucial key in marketing

research. Tourist satisfaction is important in order to be able to market destinations successfully

(Devesa, et al., 2010; Yoon & Uysal, 2005; Zabkar, et al., 2010) because it is directly linked to

destination choice, products/services consumption, and repeat visits (Kozak & Rimmington,

2000). Fang et al. (2008) report that measuring tourist satisfaction presents information related to

how well a destination matches the tourists’ needs, which may help destination marketers to

improve the quality of products and services that interest tourists. Yoon and Uysal (2005) have

found a significant relationship between destination attributes and overall tourist satisfaction.

Furthermore, Chiang and Jogaratnam (2006) claim that travel motivation studies frequently give

4
more attention to the general population. Thus, instead of heterogeneous marketing which

focuses on specific groups, researchers can discover the desires of smaller homogeneous groups.

On the other hand, research carried out on Muslim travel motivations has not received the same

level of attention as is given to identifying western travel motives, even though the Muslim

population has emerged as a global market in recent years(WTM,2007).

2.1.1 Research Gaps in Tourism Motivation and Tourist Satisfaction Literature

It is noted that very few empirical studies (i.e Bogari et al., 2004; Weidenfeld & Ron, 2008

) have been conducted to purely examining the travel motivation for Muslim tourists. Moreover,

it is very important to recognize that no research has been conducted to investigate tourism

motivations for Muslim tourists from different religious denominations as suggested by Haq and

Jackson(2009). To fill this gap, the current study will try to determine the possible tourism

motivations that drive Muslim tourists to travel and select a specific destination. Furthermore,

using the travel motivation theory (push and pull) as a base, many researchers have tried to give

more attention to the pull and push relationship by frequently modifying items associated with

the constructs. To fill this gap, in addition to studying the tourism motivation for Muslim

tourists, this research will also investigate the relationship between tourism motivation and the

overall tourist satisfaction.

The influence of travel motivation on overall tourist satisfaction has been studied in

previous research (e.g.Chi & Qu, 2008; Devesa, et al., 2010; Dunn Ross & Iso-Ahola, 1991;

Fang, et al., 2008; Fielding et al., 1992; Yoon & Uysal, 2005; Zabkar, et al., 2010). Each

variable, push motivations (PUSM) and pull motivations (PULM), have hypothesized effects on

5
overall tourist satisfaction (OTS).To test the relationship between travel motivations (pull and

push) and overall tourist satisfaction, the following hypotheses are proposed (See Fig. 1):

H1: the push motivations (PUSM) positively influence overall tourist satisfaction (OTS).

H2: the pull motivations (PULM) positively influence overall tourist satisfaction (OTS).

2.2 Religion (Islam)

The link between religion and consumer behaviour has been recognized theoretically.

Prior studies show the impact of religion on behaviour and purchasing decisions (Delener, 1990;

Fam et al., 2004; Hirschman, 1981; Weaver & Agle, 2002). Furthermore, a range of studies have

investigated religion’s impact on habits, attitudes, people’s values and behaviour. In their study,

Essoo and Dibb (2004) provide substantial affirmation for presenting religion as an important

variable in the study of consumer behaviour and they have found that religion influences how

people shop. Tourism and religion may affect tourist behaviour; for example, religion influences

the destination choice, tourist product favourites, and the selection of religious opportunities and

facilities offered (Weidenfeld & Ron, 2008). The encouragement of tourists likely to meet the

requirements of Shari'a law is termed Muslim tourism (Noel Scott& Jafar Jafari, 2010).

Fang et al. (2008) support that tourists almost certainly select destinations that are

supposed to best fulfil their internal desires or preferred destination attributes. Religion emerges

as a distinct type of attraction in tourism literature (Din, 1989). Therefore, the availability of

some religious attributes that meet the needs of Muslim tourists may play an important role in

Islamic tourism. Religion should be more recognized in the context of the current competitive

tourism market (Weidenfeld & Ron, 2008).

6
 If the destination marketers understand and are aware of the reasons why Muslim tourists

travel, they may be able to launch successful marketing campaigns based on tourism

motivations. Bogari et al. (2004) claim that destination attributes and issues pertaining to Islamic

culture have not been sufficiently covered by researchers. By using qualitative data, Battour et al.

(2011) identifies Islamic attributes of destination that may attract Muslim tourists, e.g. prayer

facilities, Halal food, Islamic entertainment, Islamic dress codes, general Islami c morality and

the Islamic call for prayer. Furthermore, it has been recommended to study the effect of catering

to the religious needs of tourists in order to gain a high level of satisfaction (Fleischer, 2000;

Weidenfeld & Ron, 2008). In line with that, Battour et al. (2010) claim that future research is

needed to explore the religious attributes of destination which may satisfy Muslim tourists.

Battour et al. (2011) also recommend that the needs of Muslim travellers should be studied

empirically by developing instruments for quantitative research.

2.2.1 Research Gaps related to religion (Islam)

Although the relationship between tourism and religion has been addressed in the

literature on tourism, there remains a shortage of theoretical publications in the area of tourism in

the context of Islam. When it comes to the relationship between tourism and Islam, the lack of

literature is more obvious, especially regarding Islamic norms and practices related to tourism at

the destination and their impact on the needs of Muslim tourists. Furthermore, no study currently

exists that provides a model which includes Islamic norms and practices at the destination in

order to test their impact on Muslim tourist satisfaction. When the Muslim traveller decides to

travel (push motivation) and selects a specific destination (pull motivation), he /she may be

satisfied if the religious attributes are available. However, the availability of reli gious attributes

7
may not be the only reason satisfying Muslim traveller. Religious attributes could be

complementary factor in the satisfaction of Muslim tourists, strengthening the relationship

between travel motivations and satisfaction. Therefore, as a moderating variable, religion,

Islamic norms and practices related to tourism at the destination (INP), is proposed between

tourism motivations and overall tourist satisfaction, as shown in Figure 1.

The impact of religion on behaviour and purchasing decisions has been discussed in

previous studies (Delener, 1990; Essoo & Dibb, 2004; Hirschman, 1981). Weidenfeld (2006)

supports that the availability of goods and services to suit the religious needs of tourists will

increase their satisfaction. Therefore, it has been posited that religion (INP) moderates the

relationships between push motivations (PUSM) and overall tourist satisfaction (OTS), as well as

the relationship between pull motivations (PULM) and overall tourist satisfaction (OTS). Using

the propositions arrived at through the literature review, the following hypotheses were

developed:

H3: Religion (INP) moderates the relationship between the push motivations (PUSM) overall

tourist satisfaction (OTS).

H4: Religion (INP) moderates the relationship between the pull motivations (PULM) and overall

tourist satisfaction (OTS).

8
 INP
H3 H4
PUSM H1

OTS

H2

PULM

Key: PUSM – Push motivations; PULM – Pull motivations; OTS – overall tourist satisfaction;
INP – Islamic norms and practices related to tourism at the destination

Fig.1. Theoretical Framework

3. RESEARCH METHODS

3.1 Questionnaire design

This study follows the sequence of steps that should be performed in developing

measures of constructs, as suggested by Churchill (1979). Four stages are suggested for

developing religion as a construct. Stage one includes determining the domain by conducting a

thorough review of tourism and Islamic teachings literature. Stage two includes generating items

that capture the domain, as specified on the basis of combining qualitative research (Two FGDs

& 53 interviews with tourists) and reviewing the literature. Stage three involves purifying the

measures through a panel of tourism experts and Islamic scholars, and then carrying out a pre-

test. Stage four includes fine-tuning the measures through exploratory factor analysis, a

reliability assessment, and construct validity assessment. Once the internal consistency and

9
construct validity have been decided as satisfactory, the Islamic norms and practices related to

tourism at the destination (INP) – the ‘religion’ instruments- can be used for further analysis. The

INP construct consists of 18 items.

In order to measure the overall tourist satisfaction (OTS), the measurements developed

by Bigné et al. (2005), Chi & Qu (2008), Del-Bosque & Martín (2008), and Yoon & Uysal

(2005) were adopted. The OTS construct consists of four items. Tourism motivation items

(push/pull) were adopted from previous research (Baloglu & Uysal, 1996; Jang & Cai, 2002;

Jang & Wu, 2006; Yoon & Uysal, 2005). The push motivation (PUSM) construct consists of 30

items, and the pull motivation (PULM) consists of 24 items.

This study was conducted in Malaysia because of convenient accessibility to Muslim tourists.

A total of 1,300 questionnaires were distributed (Administered from February to May 2010) in

international hotels and tourism sites in four Malaysian cities: Kuala Lumpur, Kuala Terengganu,

Penang, and Johor Bahru. The questionnaires were handed out in these cities following a

convenience sampling approach. There was a scanning question on the cover page of the

questionnaire to determine whether or not the tourist was Muslim or not. If the tourist was a

Muslim, he/she was invited to proceed in filling in the questionnaire. The questionnaires were

distributed in two versions –Arabic and English. The study used a questionnaire in Arabic

because some of the tourists visiting Malaysia are from the Arab countries and may not

understand English.

3.2 Measurement model

Before assessing of the measurement model, both exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and

confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were performed for the purpose of data reducti on in tourism

motivations and Religion. The principal components analysis (PCA) method was applied for this

study. The items with factor a loading above the cut-off point │0.50│are retained for further

10
analysis (Hair et al., 2010). All of these procedures were performed using SPSS 18. The

confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) is a special case of the structural equation model (SEM). The

process of item purification is applied through multiple iterations of CFA, with the maximum

likelihood estimation (MLE) method. The unfitted items are deleted from the measurement

model. As recommended by Hair et al. (2010), a modification of the initially hypothesized model

is performed where it is seen to be applicable. This is achieved based on such indicat ors as

modification indices (MI≥4), standardized residuals (< │4.0│), path estimates (≥0.5; ideally

≥0.7; and be significant), and squared multiple correlations (SMC or Reliability≥0.3). These

model diagnostics are used to suggest some model changes, which are known by specification

search, whereby an empirical trial-and-error approach is used (Hair et al., 2010).

The measurement models are commonly used to assess the construct validity (Churchill,

1979). The construct validity involves the evaluation of the degree to which a measure correctly

measures what it is supposed to measure (Cavana et al., 2008; Chen & Paulraj, 2004; Hair, et al.,

2010; Malhotra, 2007). To achieve a construct validity, some conditions must be satisfied

including: unidimensionality, reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity (O'Leary-

Kelly & Vokurka, 1998). Unidimensionality means that a set of items can be explained by a

single underlying construct (Hair et al., 2010, p. 696). The procedure for assessing

unidimensionality requires that the items are significantly associated with an underlying

construct, plus each item being associated with one, and only one, latent variable (O'Leary-Kelly

& Vokurka, 1998). By using EFA, the indicator variables load on only one construct with a

factor loading of ±0.5. By using CFA, the regression weights are 0.5 or higher with their

significant t-values (t-value ≥ 1.96 at a=0.05), as recommended by Hair et al. (2010, pp.

117,708).

11
 To achieve a good reliability, the reliability coefficient or Cronbach’s alpha should be .7

or higher (Hair et al., 2010, p. 125). By using CFA, composite reliability (CR) is used which

refers to the internal consistency of indicators measuring the underlying factors (Fornell &

Larcker, 1981). The rule of thumb of CR is that 0.7 or higher implies good reliability (Hair et al.,

2010, p. 710).

To examine the convergent validity, the average variance extracted (AVE) was computed

by the indicators corresponding to each of the study constructs. AVE is the amount of variance

that is captured by the construct in relation to the amount of variance due to measurement error.

If the AVE is less than 0.50, the variance due to measurement error is larger than the variance

captured by the construct, and the validity of the individual indicators, as well as the construct, is

questionable (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Thus, the convergent validity is established if the AVE

for each construct accounts for 0.50 or more of the total variance as applied by Battor and

Battour (2010).The discriminant validity is the extent to which the measure is indeed novel and

not simply a reflection of some other variable (Churchill, 1979). It is the extent to which the

measures of the constructs are distinctly different from each other. The discriminant validity was

examined using the procedure recommended by Fornell and Larcker (1981), whereby the

discriminant validity is established for a construct if its AVE is larger than its shared variance

with any other construct. The AVE was compared with the highest variance that each construct

shares with the other constructs in the model.

3.3 Structure model

The partial least square (PLS) technique is selected to assess the structural model in the

current study. PLS and structural equation modelling (SEM) are second generation data analysis

12
techniques (Gefen et al., 2000). Although there are some diversities between the PLS and SEM

programmes, the basic specification of the structural model is similar (Hair, et al., 2010, p. 775).

The SEM is a covariance-based approach using a fitting model to compare the researcher’s

model, as given by theory, to the best possible model fit. SEM is more focused on explanation

and is a more appropriate tool for theory testing (Hair et al., 2010, p. 776). In contrast, PLS is

designed to explain the variance, variance-based, similar to OLS multiple regressions (Gefen, et

al., 2000). Therefore, the focus is much more on prediction (Hair et al., 2010, p. 776). PLS

estimates the parameter that minimizes the residual variance of all the dependent variables in the

model, rather than estimating the variance of all observed variables as in covariance-based

SEM(Gefen, et al., 2000).

Although PLS can be used for confirming the theory; it can also be used to suggest

whether relationships exist or not and to propose suggestions for further testing (Chin, 1998). In

general, PLS is a prediction model (Chin, 1998; Chin & Newsted, 1999). The use of PLS

methodology has become an increasingly popular technique in empirical research in international

marketing, which may signify an appreciation of the unique methodological features of PL S

(Henseler et al., 2009). Henseler et al. (2009) have reported that “As of March 2008, more than

30 articles on international marketing using PLS were published in double-blind reviewed

journals”. Moreover, PLS may be considered as the method of choice for successful factor

studies in marketing (Albers, 2009 cited in Henseler et al., 2009) and for estimating the various

customer satisfaction index models (Fornell, 1992).

PLS has been increasingly used as an alternative to SEM (Hair et al., 2010, p. 775). Thus,

the major reasons for using PLS in the current study as opposed to SEM are: (a) PLS is more

suitable for exploratory studies such as the current study, where some measures are new and the

13
relationships have not been previously tested enough (Ainuddin et al., 2007; Hair, et al., 2010;

Holzmüller & Kasper, 1991; Lee et al., 2006; Tsang, 2002); (b) PLS is recommended for

complex models focusing on the prediction and latent variable model of interaction effects (Chin

et al., 2003). It is, therefore, necessary to use PLS as the proposed model including a moderating

variable; (c) PLS is recommended when multi-item measures are not available for latent

constructs (Hair et al., 2010, p. 778), which is similar to the current study, because the overall

tourist satisfaction variable has only four items; (d) PLS is suggested where relationships might

or might not exist (Chin, 1998) and where theory is insufficiently grounded (Acedo & Jones,

2007); (e) At an early stage of the model development, the regression based approach of PLS is

considered more suitable than the covariance-based methods such as SEM (Venaik et al., 2005),

and (f) PLS determines the relationship between established indicators to its respective latent

variables, which is critical for validating the exploratory models (Julien & Ramangalahy, 2003;

Mahmood et al., 2004).

In order to examine the relationship between the constructs in the proposed model as well

as to test the hypotheses, two stages of analysis were performed to evaluate the structural model:

(a) Structural model without the moderating variable, and (b) Structural model with the

moderating variable. The method of examining competing models was applied in these two

stages as recommended by previous researchers (Chin et al., 2003; Sarkar et al., 2001; Walter et

al., 2006). The path modelling and analysis were performed using SmartPLS software

(http://www.smartpls.com/).The path coefficients and the R-squared values derived from the

competing models provided the statistical basis for hypotheses testing to determine whether the

hypothesized relationships were statistically significant. The path coefficients reflect the strength

of the relationship between the exogenous and endogenous variables. The R-squared value

14
indicates the predictive power of a model for the endogenous variables. The significance of the

paths is determined by calculating the t-value using a bootstrap resampling method (500

samples).The Bootstrap is a general statistical technique for assessing uncertainty through re -

sampling data with data replacement (Chin, 1998).

The effect size is also calculated, this being a measure of the strength of the theoretical

relationship, including the moderating effect (Chin, et al., 2003). The effect size values of .02,

.15, and .35 are considered small, moderate and large effects, respectively (Cohen, 1988); the

effect size is calculated using the following equation:

Effect size = R-squared(interaction effect) − R-squared(main effect) ∕ 1− R-squared(main effect)

The interaction effect is a result of multiplying the independent and moderator variable, and to

decrease the possible problems with multi-collinearity resulting from interaction terms. The

mean was centred to the indicators prior to multiplying them, as suggested by Chin et al. (2003).

The significance of the effect size was tested with the F statistic, as suggested by Tabachnick and

Fidell (2007, p. 148).

4. DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

4.1 Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis

Out of 1,300 questionnaires, 551 were completed and returned. This represented an

effective response rate of 42.3%. After data cleaning, the final sample size was 508. The EFA

results significantly determined the correlated factors, including six push travel motivations, five

15
pull travel motivations, and four factors representing religion (Tables 1, 2 and 3). Seven items

were dropped from push motivations, while four items were dropped from pull motivations and

no items were dropped from religion (INP). After EFA, the measures were subjected to

confirmatory factor analysis using AMOS 18 software. The purification of items for the purpose

of searching for model specifications (Hair et al., 2010) was performed. Seven push items and

eight pull items were dropped, as they could not survive the model diagnostic procedure. The

results of the confirmatory factor analysis of the modified models of the push motivations, pull

motivations, and religion are summarized in Table 4.

16
 Table 1
Push Factors
Variance Cronbach Mean
Push factors Loading
explained alpha (Std. dv.)
Factor 1: Achievement 35.58 .950 3.21(.717)
Meeting new people .808
Going places friends have not been .862
Talking about the trip .858
Indulging in luxury .829
Factor 2: Exciting and adventure 7.42 .839 3.05(.589)
Finding thrills and excitement .727
Being entertained and having fun .755
Being daring and adventuresome. .779
Being free to act how I feel .608
Factor 3: Family togetherness 5.60 .942 3.24(.682)
Visiting places my family came from .812
Visiting friends and relatives .774
Being together as a family .801
Seeing as much as possible .714
Factor 4: Knowledge/education 5.43 .850 3.01(.712)
Learning new things or increasing
.721
knowledge
Experiencing new/different .682
Seeing and experiencing a foreign
.708
destination
Visiting historical places .759
Factor 5: Escape 4.828 .871 3.06(.677)
Getting away from the demands at home .836
Getting a change from a busy job .828
Feeling at home away from home .664
Experiencing a simpler lifestyle .771
Factor 6: Sports 3.728 .555 2.66(.710)
Participating in sports .787
Desire to watch sports events .603
Participate in physical activity .758
Total variance explained 62.61
KMO = .926 Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity p- Value =.000

17
 Table 2
Pull Factors
Variance Cronbach’s Mean
Pull factors Loading
explained alpha (Std. dv.)
Factor 1: Natural scenery 35.71 .884 3.00(.806)
Outstanding scenery .601
Mountainous areas .868
Natural ecological sites .867
Wilderness and undisturbed nature .839
Factor 2: Wide space & activities 8.45 .875 2.95(.682)
Wide spaces to get away from crowds .842
Variety of activities to see .604
Water sports .812
Personal safety .835
Factor 3: Cleanness & shopping 7.74 .939 3.06(.699)
Standards of hygiene and cleanness .754
Shopping facilities .810
Reliance/privacy .749
High quality restaurants .796
Factor 4: Modern atmosphere 5.48 .784 2.92(.718)
Modern cities .770
Exotic atmosphere .671
First class hotels .784
Reliable weather .749
Factor 5: Different culture 5.06 .722 2.98(.611)
Interesting and friendly local people .661
Different culture from my own .678
Historic old cities .734
Interesting town/village .750
Total variance explained 62.46
KMO = .888 Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity p- Value =.000

18
 Table 3
INP Factors
Variance Cronbach’s Mean
INP factors Loading
explained alpha (Std. dv.)
Factor 1: Worship facilities 52.43 .883 3.76(.533)
Availability of Mosque (Masjid) .752
Availability of prayer facilities at tourism sites, airport, .726
shopping malls, hotels, conference halls, parks, etc.
Presence of loud public pronouncement of Azan to .761
indicate prayer time.
Placement of Qibla direction (Qibla stickers/direction .642
point towards Makkah city) in your hotel room
Provision of a copy of the Holy Qur’an in each hotel
.727
room
Availability of water supply in toilets at tourism sites, .648
airport, shopping mall, hotel, parks, etc.
Factor 2: Halalness 7.57 .893 3.76 (.535)
Availability of Halal food at tourism sites, airport, .708
shopping malls, hotels, parks, etc.
Availability of segregated Halal kitchen in hotels and .714
restaurants
Availability of segregated areas for women at beaches .753
Availability of hotels with segregated swimming pools .697
and gymnasium for men and women
Banning of sex channels in hotel entertainment system .747
Factor 3: General Islamic morality 6.46 .889 3.78(.563)
Observation of Islamic dress code by hotel and .624
restaurant staff
Prevalence of Islamic dress code (e.g. Hijab) at public .670
places
Banning by the authority of prostitution .779
Banning by the authority of indecent display of affection .649
between sexes at public places (such as kissing etc.)
Censorship by the authority of adult scenes in movies .745
shown on TV
Factor 4: Alcoholic drinks and gambling free 5.70 .918 3.79(.606)
Banning of alcoholic drinks by the authority at public .857
places (such as tourism sites, hotels, parks, etc.)
Banning of gambling activities by the authority at public .862
places (such as tourism sites, hotels, parks, etc.)
Total variance explained 72.18
KMO = .943 Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity p- Value =.000

19
 Table 4
Fit Measures for the CFA Models
Acceptable
Fit Indexes PUSM PULM INP
level
Chi-square 203.582 95.886 304.933
Degree of freedom (df) 94 48 129
p 0.000 0.000 0.000 >0.05
Normed Chi-square (CMIN/DF) 2.166 1.998 2.364 < 3.00
Goodness-of-fit Index (GFI) 0.953 0.970 0.938 ≥ 0.90
Adjusted Goodness-of-fit Index (AGFI) 0.932 0.951 0.918 ≥ 0.90
Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) 0.981 0.992 0.968 ≥ 0.90
Comparative Fit Index (CFI) 0.985 0.994 0.973 ≥ 0.90
Root Mean Square of Error of Estimation 0.048 0.044 0.052 ≤0.08
(RMESA)
Key: PUSM – Push motivations; PULM – Pull motivations; OTS – overall tourist satisfaction;
INP – Islamic norms and practices related to tourism at the destination

4.2 Measurement Model

It was found that the items in EFA have a loading of ≥ 0.5 (.601 to .868). In the CFA

results, all the regression weights (.51 to .99; with their significant t-values) are also greater than

0.5, the threshold recommended by Hair et al. (2010). These results verified that the existence of

the uni-dimensionality was established in this study. To achieve a level of good reliability, the

alpha ranges in EFA were .55 to .95. It is notable that one alpha value (PUSM) falls below the

threshold of 0.7 as recommended by Hair et al. (2010). However, the value is still above 0.5, the

threshold recommended by Nunnally (1978). Thus, it is still acceptable. The composite

reliability values calculated from the CFA results indicate a high level of reliability, as all the

alpha values are above the recommended threshold of 0.7. All the results of the uni-

dimensionality and reliability assessment are presented in Table 5.

20
 Table 5
Results of Unidimensionality and Reliability Assessment
Unidimensionality Reliability
EFA CFA EFA CFA
Constructs
Factor Regression Critical Cronbach’s Composite
loading weight Ratio Alpha Reliability
PUSM .603-0.862 .76-.95 18-40 .55-0.95 .87-.94
PULM .601-0.868 .82-.99 23-65 .72-0.93 .95-.98
INP .624-0.860 .51-.93 12-26 .88-0.91 .88-.91
Acceptable ±.3 to ±.4; λ≥.50 t ≥ 1.96 α≥.7 CR≥.7
level ideally ±.5 at α= .05

To assess the convergent validity, the average variance extracted (AVE) was examined by

running the smartPLS software for the entire measurement model. The results revealed that the

measures exceeded the recommended level of 0.50 for push motivation (0.530), pull motivation

(0.591), overall tourist satisfaction (0.737), and religion (0.542), providing evidence of

convergent validity. The discriminant validity is established if the square root of the average

variance extracted (AVE) for each construct is greater than the value for the correlations between

the given construct and each of the other constructs (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Table 6 shows

that the bold number in the diagonal of the table, the square root of the average variance

extracted (AVE), is always greater than the correlation values. These results suggest an

acceptable discriminant validity for the study measures. To sum up, these measurement model

results are satisfactory and suggest that it is suitable to proceed with the evaluation of the

structural model.

21
 Table 6
Correlation between Constructs
PUSM PULM INP OTS

PUSM 0.728
PULM 0.305 0.768
INP 0.353 0.501 0.736
OTS 0.402 0.626 0.723 0.858

4.3 Analysis of the Structural Model and Testing of Hypotheses

A two-stage approach is followed for evaluating the interaction effects of moderating

variables modelled in PLS (Chin, et al., 2003; Henseler & Chin, 2010; Sarkar, et al., 2001;

Walter, et al., 2006). This issue was investigated by comparing the baseline model in stage1 with

the model in stage 2 (See Fig. 2). In stage 1, the model included only the INP as the main effect

but the model in stage 2 includes INP as the main effect as well as the interaction effect of INP

on overall tourist satisfaction (Endogenous variable). The interaction effect (INP* PUSM,

INP*PULM) is a result of multiplying the independent variable (PUSM, PULM) and the

moderator variable (INP), as suggested by Chin et al. (2003). A bootstrapping method of

sampling with replacement was used, and standard errors computed on the basis of 500

bootstrapping runs. The effect size is also calculated. The comparison of the two stages is

presented in Table 7.

22
 PUSM
.11(3.85)

.51(11.14)
INP OTS

.33(7.56)
PULM
Stage 1: Main effect

INP * PUSM
PUSM
.14(4.42)
-.11(1.25)

.49(10.34)
INP OTS

.15(5.05)
.27(6.04)
PULM INP * PULM

Stage 2: Interaction effect

Fig.2. Testing Moderating Variable

Results in stage 1 indicate that the direct paths, PUSM to OTS, PULM to OTS, and INP to

OTS, are statistically significant as the t-values (3.85, 7.56, and 11.14) are greater than 1.64. The

explained variance (R-squared) is 0.54 for overall tourist satisfaction (OTS). The goodness-of-fit

(GoF) is 0.56. whereas the results in stage 2, compared with stage 1, show that the R-squared

was increased to 0.66 providing evidence of a better-explained variance. The effect size is 0.26

23
indicating that the Religion (INP) has a more than moderate effect (0.26 > 0.15) on overall

tourist satisfaction (OTS). Using procedures suggested by Tabachnick and Fidell (2007, p.148),

the increased R-squared is attributable to the moderating effects and the effect size is statistically

significant at 0.05 (F3, 504 =129.6 > Critical = 2.6). The GoF increased from 0.56 to 0.62,

indicating a better fit of the Model in stage 2.

Table 7
Tests of PLS Path with Bootstrap for Stage 1 and Stage 2
Stage 1 Stage 2
Path Path
t-value t-value
coefficient coefficient
PUSM → OTS 0.11 3.85* 0.14 4.42*
PULM→ OTS 0.33 7.56* 0.27 6.04*
INP → OTS 0.51 11.14* 0.49 10.34*
PUSM*INP→ OTS - - -0.11 1.25
PULM*INP→ OTS - - 0.15 5.05*
R-squared 0.54 0.66
GoF** 0.56 0.62
Effect size - 0.26
*Sig. if above 1.64 for 1-tailed test.

** GoF= √ [(average communality) × (average R square)] . Average communality is

computed as a weighted average of the different communalities with the weight s
being the number of indicators per latent variable (Tenenhaus et al., 2005).

In stage 2, the moderating effect of INP on the relationship between the pull motivation

and overall tourist satisfaction is statistically significant as the t-value of the interaction path

(PULM*INP to OTS) is 5.05 and higher than 1.64. However, the results show no support for the

moderating effects of INP on the relationship between the push motivation and overall tourist

satisfaction as the t-value of this path (PUSM*INP to OTS) is 1.25 and less than 1.64. These

results suggest that the Model in stage 2 is better than the Model in stage1 and provides evidence

that Religion (INP) moderates the relationship between pull motivation (PULM) and overall

tourist satisfaction (OTS). Table 8 shows that the results supported hypotheses H1, H2, and H4,

24
as evidenced by the path coefficient and significant t-value, while hypothesis H3 was not

supported, meaning that there is no significant moderating relationship between PUSM and OTS

by INP.

Table 8
Results of Hypothesis Testing Using the Structural Model Results
Path Empirical
Hypothesis Relationship t-value
coefficient conclusions
H1 PUSM → OTS 0.14 4.42* Supported
H2 PULM→ OTS 0.27 6.04* Supported
H3 PUSM*INP→ OTS -0.11 1.25 Not Supported
H4 PULM*INP→ OTS 0.15 5.05* Supported
*Sig. if above 1.64 for 1-tailed test.

5. CONCLUSION

The results clearly indicate that there is a relationship between push motivation and overal l

tourist satisfaction (β = 0.14, t-value (4.42) >1.64). However, this finding is not similar to the

outcome of the Yoon and Uysal study (2005), as the relationship between tourist satisfaction and

push travel motivation was not supported. This may be explained by using SEM in Yoon and

Uysal’s study to test this relationship, which is totally dissimilar to the PLS used in this study.

Furthermore, the results of the PLS indicate that the pull motivation significantly and positively

relates to overall tourist satisfaction (β = 0.27, t-value (6.04) > 1.64). This result confirms robust

findings which suggest that a positive and direct relationship exists between the destination

attributes and overall tourist satisfaction. Determining the preferable destination attributes for

tourists may also help destination marketers to design and develop better products and services.

The findings of this study show a similar outcome to that of previous studies in terms of

the relationship between destination attributes and overall tourist satisfaction. For example,

Devesa et al. (2010) empirically confirm that specific attributes of destination affect the level of

25
visitor satisfaction. Zabkar et al. (2010) have found that destination attributes affect tourist

satisfaction, while Fang et al. (2008) report that destination attributes are a function of overall

tourist satisfaction. Chi and Qu (2008) support that satisfaction with destination attributes has a

positive impact on overall tourist satisfaction. Lastly, Yoon and Uysal (2005) have found that

destination attributes (small size and reliable weather, cleanliness & shopping, night life and

local cuisine) have an impact on overall tourist satisfaction. The results show that four factors

were extracted from amongst eighteen Islamic norms and practices items and labelled: worship

facilities, Halalness, general Islamic morality, alcoholic drinks and the absence of gambling.

Among these four factors, a lack of public consumption of alcohol and public gambling activities

were found to be the most important Islamic norms and practices with a mean score of 3.79,

followed by general Islamic morality (3.78), worship facilities (3.765), and Halalness (3.763).

The four factors were subjected to confirmatory factor analysis, revealing results that supported

good construct validity, and were then subjected to the PLS structural model.

The results of the PLS indicate that religion significantly moderates the relationship

between the pull motivation and overall tourist satisfaction, based on significant interaction and

variance explained, as β = 0.15, t-value (5.05) >1.64. This result confirms that the availability of

Islamic norms and practices related to tourism at the destination contributes to overall tourist

satisfaction and strengthens the relationship between conventional destination attributes and

tourist satisfaction for Muslim tourists. If destination marketers outline the preferable Islamic

norms and practices to Muslim tourists, this could help them to design and tailor Halal products

and services for example providing female taxi driver. In addition, the results of the PLS reveal

that religion does not moderate the relationship between the push motivation and overall tourist

satisfaction based on insignificant interaction (β = -0.15, t-value (1.25) <1.64). In other words,

26
this relationship has not been supported by the research results, which, accordingly, show that

religion is not considered as the moderating variable between push motivation and overall tourist

satisfaction. This kind of relationship may have resulted from the nature of the push motivations

as internal desires are not related to destination attributes. Therefore, religion may fail to

strengthen this relationship.

This study empirically investigated the effects of tourism motivation on overall tourist

satisfaction focusing on the moderating role of religion (Islam) between them. Thus, this study

makes several contributions to the body of knowledge in certain areas. First, the primary

contribution of this study is the development of a theoretical framework linking tourism

motivation and religion (Islam) for a better understanding of Muslim tourist behaviour.

Secondly, this study makes methodological contributions. It employs PLS analysis to test

hypotheses, thereby enabling the simultaneous analysis of multiple effects which focus more on

predicating than confirming. This highlights the advantages of using PLS as a method of analysis

for this study, even though it is not widely used in destination marketing and tourism motive

studies. Thus, the application of this technique in this study may provide some guidelines for use

in this context. Thirdly, this study empirically investigates a new area of research.This study has

identified some Islamic norms and practices (INP), which may satisfy the Muslim tourists. The

identified INP and their corresponding items can be used in advancing the study on INP

pertaining to Muslim countries similar to that of Malaysia, and thus enable comparative studies

in other countries.

Fourthly, the theoretical model was developed based on the theory of pull and push

motivation by adding the religion construct as the moderating variable. Such additions of Islamic

norms and practices to the theory may be considered as a contribution, which will open a new

27
area for future research. Understanding the moderating effects of INP on the links between

tourism motivation and overall tourist satisfaction is of extreme importance as it enables the

interactive effects of INP on the direct relationships between PULM and OTS to be studied.

Fifth, the findings of this study should help marketers to better understand “Islamic tourism” and

so develop marketing strategies to attract Muslim tourists. A destination can enhance the

probability of its selection if its ability to meet the needs that the selected travel segments

consider important can be identified and marketed. Furthermore, this study could offer some

useful and practical guidelines for tourism organizations and other types of business wishing to

successfully satisfy Muslim customers. Moreover, destination marketers might be able to design

creative programmes that harness the unique characteristics of tourism products to satisfy and

delight Muslim tourists; For example, designing resorts that fully meet Islamic religious needs,

such as segregated beaches, segregated swimming pools, and alcoholic free drinking.

For the purpose of future research, and since it is considered as a limitation to the present

study, the first limitation concerns the context of the study (Malaysia) and the use of convenience

sampling method, which may constrain on the generalisation of results, compared with other

countries. No claim can be made, therefore, for the generalisation of the findings beyond these

contexts. Further research is underway to extend the current work to several other countries.

Focusing on country other than Malaysia will increase our understanding of Islamic norms and

practices at the destination in other contexts and help to demonstrate the universality and global

importance of that concept. Future research that replicates this study in other contexts would be

welcome and would further improve our understanding of the significance of the impact that pull

motivation has on overall tourist satisfaction, based on the availability of Islamic norms and

practices at the destination. Furthermore,, future research might investigate distinctive Islamic

28
norms and practices at the destination through a comparison with specific countries. This is

extremely important as there are significant cultural differences in the way different Muslims

travel between countries and these may provide substantial insights into understanding the

research results. The second limitation is related to the selection of the PLS as a method of

predicting relationships in the proposed theoretical model. Therefore, it is recommended to

conduct this study by collecting new data and using the structural equation model to confirm

these relationships. Further research also needs to be carried out with other tourism motivation

measures (items) (e.g.,Kau & Lim, 2005; S. S. Kim, Lee, & Klenosky, 2003) and the addition of

religious motivations items (pull and pull) which are similar to those in this study. Moreover,

research is also needed to investigate the direct impact of religious attributes on satisfaction.

Finally, areas such as Islamic hospitality, Halal friendly travel, and Halal airlines need to be

covered by future research.

References

Acedo, F. J., & Jones, M. V. (2007). Speed of internationalization and entrepreneurial cognition:

Insights and a comparison between international new ventures, exporters and domestic

firms. Journal of World Business, 42(3), 236-252.

Ainuddin, R. A., Beamish, P. W., Hulland, J. S., & Rouse, M. J. (2007). Resource attributes and

firm performance in international joint ventures. Journal of World Business, 42(1), 47-60.

Albers, S. (2009). PLS and success factor studies in marketing.: In: V.EspositoVinzi, W.

W.Chin, J. Henseler & H.Wang(Eds), Handbook of partial leasts quares :Concepts,

methods, andapplications. Berlin:Springer.

29
Baloglu, S., & Uysal, M. (1996). Market segments of push and pull motivations: a canonical

correlation approach. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,

8(3), 32-38.

Battor, M., & M., B. M. (2010). The impact of customer relationship management capability on

innovation and performance advantages: testing a mediated model. Journal of Marketing

Management, 26(9), 842-857.

Battour, M. M., Ismail, M. N., & Battor, M. (2010). Toward a Halal Tourism Market. Tourism

Analysis, 15(4), 461-470.

Battour, M. M., Ismail, M. N., & Battor, M. (2011). The impact of destination attributes on

Muslim tourist's choice. International Journal of Tourism Research, 13(6), 527-540.

Battour, M. M., Ismail, M. N., & Battor, M. (2012). The Mediating Role of Tourist Satisfactio n:

A Study of Muslim Tourists in Malaysia. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 29 (3),

279-297.

Battour, M., Battor, M. and Bhatti, M. A. (2013), Islamic Attributes of Destination: Construct

Development and Measurement Validation, and Their Impact on Tourist Satisfaction. Int.

J. Tourism Res.. doi: 10.1002/jtr.19479.

Bigné, J. E., Andreu, L., & Gnoth, J. (2005). The theme park experience: An analysis of

pleasure, arousal and satisfaction. Tourism Management, 26(6), 833-844.

Bogari, N. B., Geoff Crowther, & Marr, N. (2004). Motivation for domestic tourism: a case

study of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Tourism analysis 8(2), 137-141.

Cavana, R. Y., Delahaye, B. L., & Sekaran, U. (2008). Applied business research: qualitative

and quantitative methods: John Wiley ,New York.

30
Chattalas, M., Kramer, T., & Takada, H. (2008). The impact of national stereotypes on the

country of origin effect: A conceptual framework. International Marketing Review,

25(1), 54-74.

Chen, I. J., & Paulraj, A. (2004). Towards a theory of supply chain management: the constructs

and measurements. Journal of Operations Management, 22(2), 119-150.

Chi, C. G.-Q., & Qu, H. (2008). Examining the structural relationships of destination image,

tourist satisfaction and destination loyalty: An integrated approach. Tourism

Management, 29(4), 624-636.

Chiang, C.-Y., & Jogaratnam, G. (2006). Why do women travel solo for purposes of leisure?

Journal of Vacation Marketing, 12(1), 59.

Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Modern

methods for business research, 295, 336.

Chin, W. W., Marcolin, B. L., & Newsted, P. R. (2003). A partial least squares latent variable

modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: Results from a Monte Carlo

simulation study and an electronic-mail emotion/adoption study. Information Systems

Research, 14(2), 189-217.

Chin, W. W., & Newsted, P. R. (1999). Structural equation modeling analysis with small

samples using partial least squares. Statistical strategies for small sample research, 2,

307–342.

Chitakasem, P. (2007). Halal tourism -untapped potential for middle east. [Online]. Retrieved

July 10, 2008, from http://www.wtmlondon.com/page.cfm/link=2051.

31
Chul Oh, H., Uysal, M., & Weaver, P. A. (1995). Product bundles and market segments based on

travel motivations: a canonical correlation approach. International Journal of Hospitality

Management, 14(2), 123-137.

Churchill, G. A., Jr. (1979). A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing

Constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, 16(1), 64-73.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Crescentrating. (2011). Retrieved October 12, 2011, from http://www.crescentrating.com/

Crompton, J. L. (1979). Motivations for pleasure vacation. Annals of Tourism Research, 6(4),

408-424.

Dann, G. M. S. (1981). Tourist motivation an appraisal. Annals of Tourism Research, 8(2), 187-

219.

del Bosque, I. R., & Martín, H. S. (2008). Tourist satisfaction a cognitive-affective model.

Annals of Tourism Research, 35(2), 551-573.

Delener, N. (1990). The effects of religious factors on perceived risk in durable goods purchase

decisions. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 7(3), 27.

Devesa, M., Laguna, M., & Palacios, A. (2010). The role of motivation in visitor satisfaction:

Empirical evidence in rural tourism. Tourism Management, 31(4), 547-552.

Din, K. H. (1989). Islam and tourism : Patterns, issues, and options. Annals of Tourism Research,

16(4), 542-563.

Dunn Ross, E. L., & Iso-Ahola, S. E. (1991). Sightseeing tourists' motivation and satisfaction.

Annals of Tourism Research, 18(2), 226-237.

Essoo, N., & Dibb, S. (2004). Religious Influences on Shopping Behaviour: An Exploratory

Study. Journal of Marketing Management, 20, 683-712.

32
Fam, K. S., Waller, D. S., & Erdogan, B. Z. (2004). The influence of religion on attitudes

towards the advertising of controversial products. European Journal of Marketing,

38(5/6), 537-555.

Fang, M., Yodmanee, T., & Muzaffer, U. (2008). Measuring tourist satisfaction by attribute and

motivation: The case of a nature-based resort. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 14(1), 41.

Fielding, K., Pearce, P. L., & Hughes, K. (1992). Climbing ayers rock: relating visitor

motivation, time perception and enjoyment. The Journal of Tourism Studies, 3(2), 40-52.

Fleischer, A. (2000). The tourist behind the pilgrim in the Holy Land. International Journal of

Hospitality Management, 19(3), 311-326.

Fornell, C. (1992). A national customer satisfaction barometer :TheSwedish experience. Journal

of Marketing, 56(1), 6-21.

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable

variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research, 18(1), 39-50.

Gefen, D., Straub, D., & Boudreau, M. C. (2000). Structural equation modeling and regression:

Guidelines for research practice. Communications of the Association for Information

Systems, 4(1), 7.

Goossens, C. (2000). Tourism information and pleasure motivation. Annals of Tourism Research,

27(2), 301-321.

Hair, J. F. J., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis:

pearson education, New Jersey.

Haq, F & Jackson, J (2009). Spiritual journey to Hajj: Australian and Pakistani experience.

Journal of Management, Spirituality & Religion, 6(2), 141-156.

33
Henseler, J., & Chin, W. W. (2010). A Comparison of Approaches for the Analysis of Interaction

Effects Between Latent Variables Using Partial Least Squares Path Modeling.

Multidisciplinary Journal, 17(1), 82 - 109.

Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2009). The use of partial least squares path

modeling in international marketing. Advances in International Marketing, 20, 277-319.

Hirschman, E. C. (1981). American Jewish Ethnicity: Its Relationship to Some Selected Aspects

of Consumer Behavior. Journal of Marketing (pre-1986), 45(000003), 102.

Holzmüller, H. H., & Kasper, H. (1991). On a theory of export performance: personal and

organizational determinants of export trade activities observed in small and medium -

sized firms. MIR: Management International Review, 45-70.

Howe, A. C. (2001). Queer pilgrimage: The San Francisco homeland and identity tourism.

Cultural Anthropology, 16(1), 35-61.

Iso-Ahola, S. E. (1982). Toward a social psychological theory of tourism motivation: A

rejoinder. Annals of Tourism Research, 9(2), 256-262.

Jang, S., & Cai, L. A. (2002). Travel Motivations and Destination Choice: A Study of British

Outbound Market. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing,, 13(3), 111-133.

Jang, S., & Wu, C.-M. E. (2006). Seniors' travel motivation and the influential factors: An

examination of Taiwanese seniors. Tourism Management, 27(2), 306-316.

Julien, P. A., & Ramangalahy, C. (2003). Competitive strategy and performance of exporting

SMEs: An empirical investigation of the impact of their export information search and

competencies. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(3), 227-245.

34
Kau, A. K., & Lim, P. S. (2005). Clustering of Chinese tourists to Singapore: an analysis of their

motivations, values and satisfaction. The International Journal of Tourism Research,

7(4,5), 231.

Kim, S.-S., & Lee, C.-K. (2002). Push and Pull Relationships. Annals of Tourism Research,

29(1), 257-260.

Kim, S. S., Lee, C.-K., & Klenosky, D. B. (2003). The influence of push and pull factors at

Korean national parks. Tourism Management, 24(2), 169-180.

Klenosky, D. B. (2002). The "pull" of tourism destinations: a means-end investigation. Journal

of Travel Research, 40(4), 385(311).

Kozak, M. (2002). Destination benchmarking. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(2), 497-519.

Kozak, M., & Rimmington, M. (2000). Tourist satisfaction with Mallorca, Spain, as an off-

season holiday destination. Journal of Travel Research, 38(3), 260.

Lee, K., Yang, G., & Graham, J. L. (2006). Tension and trust in international business

negotiations: American executives negotiating with Chinese executives. Journal of

International Business Studies, 37(5), 623-641.

Mahmood, M. A., Bagchi, K., & Ford, T. C. (2004). On-line shopping behavior: Cross-country

empirical research. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 9(1), 9-30.

Malhotra, N. (2007). Marketing Research: an applied orientation; : pearson education, New

Jersey.

Mansfeld, Y. (1992). From Motivation to Actual Travel. Annals of Tourism Research, 19, 399-

419.

Muslim population worldwide. (2009). Retrieved 15 November, 2009, from

http://www.islamicpopulation.com/

35
Noel Scott, Jafar Jafari (2010), Chapter 21 Conclusion, in Noel Scott, Jafar Jafari (ed.) Tourism

in the Muslim World (Bridging Tourism Theory and Practice, Volume 2), Emerald Group

Publishing Limited, pp.331-335

Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric Theory: London, McGraw-Hill.

O'Leary-Kelly, S. W., & J. Vokurka, R. (1998). The empirical assessment of construct validity.

Journal of Operations Management, 16(4), 387-405.

Pallant, J. (2005). SPSS survival manual. Philadelphia: Open University Press.

Pew Forum in Religion and Public Life. (2011). The Future of the Global Muslim Population.

Retrieved 25 May, 2011, from http://pewforum.org/The-Future-ofthe-Global-Muslim-

Population.aspx

Poria, Y., Butler, R., & Airey, D. (2003). Tourism, Religion and Religiosity: A Holy M ess.

Current Issues in Tourism, 6(4), 340-363.

Qu, H., & Ping, E. W. Y. (1999). A service performance model of Hong Kong cruise travelers'

motivation factors and satisfaction. Tourism Management, 20(2), 237-244.

Rinschede, G. (1992). Forms of religious tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 19(1), 51-67.

Sarkar, M. B., Echambadi, R., & Harrison, J. S. (2001). Alliance entrepreneurship and firm

market performance. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6-7), 701-711.

Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics: New York: Pearson

Education, Inc.

Tenenhaus, M., Esposito Vinzi, V., Chatelin, Y. M., & Lauro, C. (2005). PLS path modelling.

Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 48, 159−205.

36
Tsang, E. W. K. (2002). Acquiring knowledge by foreign partners from international joint

ventures in a transition economy: learning-by-doing and learning myopia. Strategic

Management Journal, 23(9), 835-854.

Uysal, M., & Jurowski, C. (1994). Testing the push and pull factors. Annals of Tourism

Research, 21(4), 844-846.

Uysal, M., Li, X., & Sirakaya-Turk, E. (2008). Push-pull dynamics in travel decisions Handbook

of Hospitality Marketing Management (pp. 412-439). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Venaik, S., Midgley, D. F., & Devinney, T. M. (2005). Dual paths to performance: the impact of

global pressures on MNC subsidiary conduct and performance. Journal of International

Business Studies, 36(6), 655-675.

Walter, A., Auer, M., & Ritter, T. (2006). The impact of network capabilities and entrepreneurial

orientation on university spin-off performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(4),

541-567.

Weaver, G. R., & Agle, B. R. (2002). Religiosity and ethical behavior in organizations: A

symbolic interactionist perspective. The Academy of Management Review, 27(1), 77-97.

Weidenfeld, A. (2006). Religious needs in the hospitality industry. Tourism and Hospitality

Research, 6(2), 143-159.

Weidenfeld, A., & Ron, A. (2008). Religious needs in the tourism industry.

Anatolia:international journal of tourism and hospitality research, 19(2), 18-22.

Wheeler, M. (1995). Tourism marketing ethics: an introduction. International Marketing Review,

12(4), 38-49.

WTM. (2007). The World Travel Market Global Trend Reports 2007. World Travel

Market:London.

37
 Yoon, Y., & Uysal, M. (2005). An examination of the effects of motivation and satisfaction on

destination loyalty: a structural model. Tourism Management, 26(1), 45-56.

Zabkar, V., Brencic, M. M., & Dmitrovic, T. (2010). Modelling perceived quality, visitor

satisfaction and behavioural intentions at the destination level. Tourism Management,

31(4), 537-546.

38

View publication stats