Journal of Travel Research [Link]

com/

Destination Image, Self-Congruity, and Travel Behavior: Toward an Integrative Model

M. Joseph Sirgy and Chenting Su
Journal of Travel Research 2000 38: 340
DOI: 10.1177/004728750003800402

The online version of this article can be found at:

[Link]

Published by:

[Link]

On behalf of:

Travel and Tourism Research Association

Additional services and information for Journal of Travel Research can be found at:

Email Alerts: [Link]

Subscriptions: [Link]

Reprints: [Link]

Permissions: [Link]

Citations: [Link]

>> Version of Record - May 1, 2000

What is This?

Downloaded from [Link] at University of Alabama at Birmingham on May 31, 2014

MAY 2000 OF TRAVEL RESEARCH
JOURNAL

Destination Image, Self-Congruity, and Travel

Behavior: Toward an Integrative Model
M. JOSEPH SIRGY AND CHENTING SU

An integrative model of destination image, self-congru- long tradition of addressing how self-concept is used as a
ity, and travel behavior is described in this article. In partic- cognitive referent in evaluating symbolic cues. Product sym-
ular, the model postulates relationships between destination bolic cues refer to stereotypic images of users of a product or
environment, destination visitor image, tourists’ self-concept, store (e.g., sexy, classy, fashionable, young). The same can
self-congruity, functional congruity, and travel behavior. be said in relation to a tourist’s attitude toward a destination
Travel behavior is hypothesized to be influenced signifi- (and travel behavior). That is, tourists perceive destinations
cantly by both self-congruity and functional congruity. Self- differently in terms of the destination’s typical clientele or
congruity is the match between the destination visitor image visitors. This stereotypic image of the kind of people who
and tourists’ self-concept (actual, ideal, social, and ideal so- typically visit a given destination is referred to here as desti-
cial self-image). Functional congruity is the match between nation visitor image. The greater the match between the des-
the utilitarian attributes of the destination and the tourist’s tination visitor image and the tourist’s self-concept, the more
ideal expectations related to those attributes. Self-congruity likely that the tourist has a favorable attitude toward that des-
is hypothesized to influence functional congruity. It is argued tination (and the more likely that the tourist would visit that
that the destination environment influences the formation destination). This matching process is referred to as
and change of the destination visitor image and the tour- self-congruity.
ist-perceived utilitarian destination attributes. Because self-congruity involves the match/mismatch
between the destination visitor image and a tourist’s
self-image, a relevant question, then, is which factors con-
Tourism, as the business of attracting visitors and cater- tribute to the formation of a destination’s visitor image, and
ing to their needs, has rapidly grown into the world’s largest how strong and accessible are those patron images in the
industry, surpassing autos, steel, electronics, and agriculture minds of tourists? Tourists’ perception of the destination
(McIntosh, Goeldner, and Ritchie 1995). The tourism indus- (type and quality of resorts, prices, hotel ambiance, atmo-
try has also increasingly evolved into an arena of fierce com- sphere, etc.) is likely to influence the formation and change
petition in which marketing has become an important ele- of the destination visitor image. Given that the self-concept is
ment of tourism management. Curiously, past research multidimensional in nature (e.g., actual, ideal, social, ideal
efforts in the tourism industry have tended to focus on what social self), at issue is the particular dimension of the
tourists buy, when they buy, where they buy, and how they self-concept evoked in the psychological process of self-con-
buy, but not so much on why they buy (e.g., Holloway and gruity—the matching of the tourist’s self-concept with the
Plant 1988; Mathieson and Wall 1982; G. D. Pearce 1989; P. destination visitor image. For example, will tourists evaluate
L. Pearce 1982). This article draws from the self-concept lit- a destination based on how well the visitor image fits with
erature in consumer research to help explain the psychologi- how they see themselves (actual self-image) or how they
cal underpinnings of travel behavior. Toward this end, we would like to see themselves (ideal self-image)? Certain fac-
develop an integrative model involving the effects of the des- tors, such as tourists’ status and the visibility or conspicuous-
tination environment on self-image congruence (or self-con- ness of the destination, may serve to induce the tourist to
gruity) and the effects of self-congruity on travel behavior. evaluate a destination using different dimensions of the
And, because self-congruity involves a process of matching a self-concept.
tourist’s self-concept to a destination visitor image, the In addition to evaluating a destination by focusing on the
model identifies factors that are likely to affect the develop- symbolic (person-like) attributes of the destination (as is
ment of the destination visitor image, such as destination done in self-congruity), tourists may also evaluate destina-
location, and other destination environment cues. In addi- tions based on the destination’s functional or utilitarian
tion, factors that are likely to moderate and mediate the rela- attributes. Examples of functional or utilitarian attributes of
tionship between self-congruity and travel behavior are iden- destinations include quality of service, price, aesthetics of
tified and explained. Tourism managers who understand how
self-congruity works may be in a position to develop effec-
M. Joseph Sirgy is a professor of marketing at Virginia Poly-
tive positioning strategies that increase profitability. technic Institute and State University in Blacksburg. Chenting Su is
Consumer research has shown that a consumer’s attitude an assistant professor of marketing at the University of Victoria in
toward a product (and product purchase) is influenced by the British Columbia.
matching of the product user image with the consumer’s self- Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 38, May 2000, 340-352
concept (Sirgy 1982). Indeed, consumer research has had a © 2000 Sage Publications, Inc.

Downloaded from [Link] at University of Alabama at Birmingham on May 31, 2014

 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL RESEARCH 341

FIGURE 1 FIGURE 2
AN INTEGRATED MODEL OF SELF-CONGRUITY AND THE EFFECT OF DESTINATION
FUNCTIONAL CONGRUITY IN EXPLAINING AND ENVIRONMENT ON DESTINATION VISITOR IMAGE
PREDICTING TRAVEL BEHAVIOR

mostly to the young and adventurous people. Other country-

side resorts may be seen as catering mostly to senior citizens.
Some large urban centers may be perceived as attracting
crowds of foreign visitors, whereas destinations with sun,
sand, and sea are perceived as a summer resort for domestic
vacationers (Mansfeld 1992; Mathieson and Wall 1982;
G. D. Pearce 1989; Senior 1987).
the place, accessibility from major airports or seaports, and Tourism managers promote a specific destination image
so on. The match between the destination’s level of a utilitar- in ways to maximize patronage to that site. For example,
ian attribute and the tourist’s expectation of that attribute is European tour packages are targeted toward trendy upscale
referred to as functional congruity. Although the focus of this buyers and are perceived to attract such visitors. Past
article is on self-congruity and its potential effects on desti- research has already demonstrated that destination image has
nation patronage, functional congruity may also affect desti- a direct bearing on destination travel behavior (e.g.,
nation travel and may be related to self-congruity. At issue are Backman and Crompton 1991; Chon 1990, 1992; Hu and
the conditions under which tourists may use self-congruity Ritchie 1993; Milman and Pizam 1995; Riley 1995). Do
versus functional congruity (or some combination thereof) to tourists use destination cues to figure out what kind of person
evaluate destination sites. In other words, various situational typically visits the destination in question? If so, what are
factors may moderate the extent to which tourists use these cues? The destination environment provides a myriad
self-congruity to evaluate various destinations. The relation- of informational cues that tourists can use to form an impres-
ship between self-congruity and destination patronage, then, sion of the typical visitor to that destination. Some of these
is likely to be contingent on a number of situational and tour- cues include the destination atmosphere, hotel facilities,
ist characteristics. Factors such as the level of touring experi- location, and prices of the tour package. It is important for
ence, touring involvement, time pressure, destination knowl- tourism managers to determine those cues used by tourists in
edge, and so on may affect the nature of the relationship forming impressions about the typical destination patron–
between self-congruity and destination patronage. destination visitor image.
Based on these considerations, a conceptual model of Before we describe destination cues that may affect the
self-congruity and travel behavior is developed in this article formation and reinforcement of the destination visitor image,
(see Figure 1). The model posits that various aspects of the the reader should note that there is a multitude of cues, some
destination and its atmosphere are related to the destination controllable by tourism managers and some uncontrollable.
visitor image. The destination visitor image is then evaluated Controllable cues are directly related to the four Ps: the desti-
in light of specific dimensions of the tourist’s self-concept to nation itself (product), the prices of the tour (price), the loca-
determine the degree of self-congruity. Self-congruity is then tion of the destination (place), and the promotion of the desti-
systematically related to travel behavior; the relationship nation (promotion). There are many uncontrollable cues,
between these two constructs, however, is moderated by a such as tourists’ personal characteristics. We will not address
number of situational and tourist characteristics. The con- the effects of uncontrollable factors because they do not have
structs and relationships in the model are described in this direct implications for tourism managers (see Figure 2).
article.1 Destination environment cues related to the product (i.e.,
the destination core service attributes) can be grouped in
terms of destination atmospherics and destination service.
DESTINATION ENVIRONMENT AND Destination atmospheric cues, such as the natural landscape,
historic interests, hotel design, and tourism infrastructure,
DESTINATION VISITOR IMAGE form the overall context within which tourists make travel
and patronage decisions and are likely to have a significant
Tourists have stereotypic images of different destinations. impact on destination image (Echtner and Ritchie 1991,
For example, European resorts may be perceived as typically 1993; Gartner 1989, 1993; Mazanec 1994). Tourism manag-
patronized by upscale tourists, whereas local national park ers realize the importance of such cues and systematically try
resorts may be perceived as frequently visited by working- to develop appropriate landscapes, historic aspects, and
class vacationers. Some skiing resorts are viewed as catering infrastructure that appeal to target tourists (Hu and Ritchie

Downloaded from [Link] at University of Alabama at Birmingham on May 31, 2014

342 MAY 2000

1993; Mansfeld 1992). The role of other people in a destina- The managerial implication of this proposition is one of
tion (i.e., the social dimension), such as whether a destina- place selection. Managers of tourist destinations can create a
tion is crowded, is also critical (McIntosh, Goeldner, and desirable destination visitor image as a direct function of the
Ritchie 1995). geographic location of the destination site. If the managers
Past research on destination environment suggests that have a choice to select the geographic region of the site, then
atmospheric cues (e.g., natural beauty, tourism infrastruc- careful study of the region image (the kind of people associ-
ture) do affect the image of the destination and the image of ated with the region) should be conducted. Sites associated
the visitors of the destination (e.g., Gray 1986; Mansfeld with regions with a desirable image should be considered. If
1992; Palmer and Bejou 1995; Seyhmus and Brinberg 1997; the managers do not have control over site selection, then the
Telisman-Kosuta 1989). That is, certain types of natural next best alternative is to conduct a promotion campaign that
landscapes (e.g., a mixture of human, physical, and cultural focuses on the geographic region of the tourism site and the
environments in a European setting), accommodations (e.g., people who reside in the region, as well as the people who
beachfront hotel), and facilities (multiple sporting resorts) typically visit that site. The goal is to create or reinforce a de-
are likely to engender an image of an upscale resort with af- sirable image of the destination visitor.
fluent visitors (Riley 1995). Take the simple example of the The price of the service plays an important role in tour-
hotel style of an upscale resort. Typically, a luxury hotel in an ists’ patronage decisions (e.g., Holloway and Plant 1988;
upscale resort has a complex facility ranging from a golf Lawson, Gnoth, and Paulin 1995). Higher prices are likely to
course to a built-in department store. Downscale resorts, on be associated with higher quality service, commonly associ-
the other hand, have only budget bed-and-breakfast facilities ated with upscale destinations and typically visited by afflu-
(Vladimir 1989). Thus, we propose the following. ent or status-conscious tourists. The service price and the
pricing policies and practices of the resort are likely to have a
Proposition 1: Tourists are likely to make inferences significant impact on the image of the visitors of the destina-
about the visitors of a destination as a direct function tion. For example, a resort that engages in heavy discounting
of destination atmospheric cues, such as the natural and does a lot of price promotions is likely to be perceived as
landscape, historic points of interest, and tourism in- catering to tourists who are price conscious and bargain hunt-
frastructure. ers. Thus, one would propose the following.

The managerial implication of this proposition is clear. Proposition 4: Tourists are likely to make inferences
Managers of a tourist destination can make specific changes about the visitors of a destination as a direct function
in the atmospheric cues of the destination (e.g., natural land- of the price associated with the various services and
scape, historic points of interest, and tourism infrastructure) facilities at the destination site.
to create or reinforce a desirable destination visitor image—
an image most tourists are likely to relate to. The managerial implication of this proposition in relation
Service quality (e.g., the ambiance of the resort, quality to price is obvious. Managers of tourist destinations can con-
of the food served in the hotel) is likely to have a significant trol the desirability of the destination visitor image by mak-
impact on the destination image and the image of its visitors ing pricing decisions consistent with a desirable destination
(Backman and Veldkamp 1995; Ostrowski, O’Brien, and visitor image.
Gordon 1993). That is, well-known, top-of-the-line facilities Advertising and other forms of marketing communica-
are likely to engender an image of an upscale destination tion can be a significant source of information for tourists.
with affluent patrons. Thus, we propose the following. Tourists may form impressions about the typical patron of a
destination based on advertising messages and cues. For
Proposition 2: Tourists are likely to make inferences example, a television commercial of a leisure cruise ship that
about the visitors of a destination as a direct function shows families enjoying a variety of facilities available for
of the quality of services at the destination site. different family members signals that this particular cruise
ship caters to families.
The managerial implication of this proposition is also Tourists also make inferences about the destination pa-
clear. Managers of tourist destination facilities can make spe- tron image by noticing the significance of the advertising
cific changes in the quality of services at their facilities. The medium. For example, an advertisement of a Mediterranean
better the quality of the services at the destination site, the cruise placed in Sun magazine rather than The New York
more likely that tourists will form a more desirable image of Times is more symbolic of economic status and class. Thus,
the destination visitor. these promotion cues are used by tourists to form/rein-
The destination location serves as a cue to reflect the typi- force/change their perceptions of the typical patron of that
cal destination visitors. For example, a beach or a lake resort destination. Hence, we propose the following.
reflects an image of visitors who want to escape the drudger-
ies of daily life. A resort located in Mecca may make a state- Proposition 5: Tourists are likely to make inferences
ment too—it caters to religious people. Thus, we propose the about the visitors of a destination as a direct function
following. of the destination’s advertising messages and media.

Proposition 3: Tourists are likely to make inferences The managerial implication of this proposition in relation
about the visitors of a destination as a direct function to promotion is most powerful (compared to what managers
of the geographic location of the destination. can do in relation to positioning, product, price, and place).

Downloaded from [Link] at University of Alabama at Birmingham on May 31, 2014

 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL RESEARCH 343

Managers of tourist destination can control the desirability of FIGURE 3

the destination visitor image by conducting an effective pro- THE MEDIATING EFFECTS OF SELF-CONCEPT
motion campaign. The goal of the promotion campaign is MOTIVES ON THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
to create or reinforce a desirable image of the destination SELF-CONGRUITY AND TRAVEL BEHAVIOR
visitor.

DESTINATION VISITOR IMAGE, TOURIST

SELF-CONCEPT, SELF-CONGRUITY, AND
TRAVEL BEHAVIOR

One of the problems in self-concept research in the social

and behavioral sciences is the plethora of definitions of
self-concept stemming from the variety of ways that the self
is viewed in the psychological literature. For example, James
(1890) defined the self-concept as all that we call our own,
and with whom or with which we share a bond of identity.
Many other traditional definitions of the self-concept focus
on a unitary self (e.g., Allport 1943; Cooley 1902; Lecky
1945; Mead 1934). However, the more recent psychological
literature in self-concept points to the possibility of multiple who have visited the destination in the past. Given such con-
selves. That is, the self is a collection of masks each tied to a gruence, a promotion campaign should be conducted that
particular set of social circumstances (Markus and Nurius shows tourists who have those personal characteristics re-
1986; Sirgy 1986). The self-concept is diverse and multifac- flective of the destination visitor image and the self-image
eted. Each self-concept domain represents the individual’s (actual, ideal, social, and/or ideal social) of the majority of
persistent hopes and fears and indicates what can be realized tourists.
in certain situations.
Consumer researchers have traditionally used four
aspects of the self-concept to explain and predict consumer SELF-CONCEPT MOTIVES MEDIATING
behavior. These are the actual self-image, the ideal self-
SELF-CONGRUITY AND DESTINATION
image, the social self-image, and the ideal social self-image
(Sirgy 1982, 1985a). The actual self-image is defined as how PATRONAGE
consumers see themselves. The ideal self-image is defined as
how consumers would like to see themselves. The social Because there are at least four different self-concept
self-image is defined as how consumers believe they are seen dimensions (actual, ideal, social, and ideal social
by significant others. The ideal social self-image is defined self-image), it follows that we should have four correspond-
as how consumers would like to be seen by significant others. ing types of self-congruities: actual, ideal, social, and ideal
Self-congruity in consumer research involves a process social self-congruity (see Figure 3).
of matching (some dimension of) a consumer’s self-concept Actual self-congruity in a tourism/travel context refers to
with the product-user image. The greater the match between the degree of match between a tourist’s actual self-image and
self-concept and the product-user image, the greater the like- a destination visitor image, or the fit between how tourists
lihood that consumers will consume that product. Research actually see themselves in relation to the image of the kind of
in tourism has identified a significant relationship between tourists that visit that destination. Actual self-image is part of
tourists’ satisfaction/dissatisfaction and tourists’ self-im- what psychologists refer to as the private self. The private
age/destination-image congruity (Chon 1990, 1992). Spe- self involves those images that one has of oneself about
cifically, the greater the congruity between the tourists’ which one feels protective. “This is who I am,” the traveler
self-image and the destination image, the greater the satisfac- might say. Thus, the actual self-image is defined as how tour-
tion. Given that consumer satisfaction reinforces a positive ists see themselves, that is, their personal identity. A Medi-
attitude toward the destination, we propose the following. terranean cruise, for example, has a specific patron image.
Tourists tend to think of the person who goes on a Mediterra-
Proposition 6: Travel behavior is affected by self-con- nean cruise as “a luxurious or wealthy tourist.” Do tourists
gruity. That is, the greater the match between the des- see themselves in this light? If so, we say that they experi-
tination visitor image and the tourist’s self-concept ence actual self-congruity. Tourists are motivated to protect
(actual, ideal, social, and/or ideal social self-image), their personal identities. Tourists may feel uncomfortable if
the more likely that this tourist will be motivated to they see themselves visiting a destination that is not reflec-
visit that destination. tive of their actual selves. For example, a working-class
woman tourist is likely to feel uncomfortable in an upscale
The managerial implication of this proposition is as fol- resort. This is because the behavior in an upscale resort is
lows. Tourism managers should conduct research to identify perceived as inconsistent with her perception of the person
the image of the destination visitor and determine whether she is. The motivational tendency to act in ways consistent
that image is congruent with the self-concept (actual, ideal, with one’s personal identity (actual self-image) is referred to
social, and ideal social self-image) of the majority of tourists the self-consistency motive in personality-social psychology

Downloaded from [Link] at University of Alabama at Birmingham on May 31, 2014

344 MAY 2000

(Lecky 1945; Sirgy 1986) and marketing (Johar and Sirgy (through visiting destinations and resorts that are consistent
1991; Sirgy 1990; Sirgy, Johar, and Claiborne 1992) (see with their ideal self-image) boosts their self-esteem. For
Figure 3). example, a ski resort may have a destination visitor image of
The effect of actual self-congruity on consumer behavior youthful, adventuresome, and classy. If this image matches
has been documented through many studies conducted in the tourists’ ideal self-image, then visiting the ski resort is likely
context of both consumer goods and retail stores. In the con- to boost their self-esteem. Have you ever run into a work-
text of consumer goods, a handful of studies sought to dem- ing-class person who likes to visit upscale destinations? Per-
onstrate that consumers who prefer a product (or actually haps this person has an ideal self-image of becoming upscale.
own it) see themselves in ways consistent with the prod- Visiting an upscale destination serves to help the work-
uct-user image (e.g., Belch and Landon 1977; Bellenger, ing-class person approach his or her ideal self-image of
Steinberg, and Stanton 1976; Birdwell 1968; Ericksen and becoming upscale (see Figure 3).
Sirgy 1989, 1992; Grubb and Hupp 1968; Grubb and Stern The effect of ideal self-congruity on consumer behavior
1971; Hughes and Guerrero 1971; Landon 1974; Malhotra has been documented through several studies done in the
1981, 1988; Martin and Bellizzi 1982; Ross 1971; Sirgy context of consumer goods. Specifically, several studies
1980, 1985b; Sirgy and Danes 1982; Sirgy et al. 1991; Sirgy were able to demonstrate that consumers who express prefer-
et al. 1997). In travel and tourism research, studies have iden- ence for particular brands (or report owning these brands)
tified sociodemographic and psychographic factors that de- would like to see themselves in ways consistent with the
termine tourists’ motive to travel and their choices of desti- product-user image of these brands (e.g., Ericksen and Sirgy
nation (Klenosky, Charles, and Michael 1993; Pizam and 1989, 1992; Malhotra 1981, 1988; Sirgy 1985b). Several
Calantone 1987; Sheldon and Mark 1987; Witt and Martin studies have found that the travel behavior of the upper class
1987). For example, research has found that tourists choose is imitated by other social classes, in particular the intellec-
destinations whose images (actual or real) match their per- tual lower middle class, in developed countries (Amin 1979;
sonal values (e.g., status) (Ascher 1985; Beatty et al. 1990; Ascher 1985). The following proposition is deduced from
Hsieh and O’Leary 1994; Jackson 1973). Thus, we propose this discussion:
the following.
Proposition 8: Ideal self-congruity affects travel behav-
Proposition 7: Actual self-congruity affects travel behav- ior. That is, tourists who experience a match between
ior. That is, tourists who experience a match between the visitor image of a destination and their ideal
the visitor image of a destination and their actual self-image will be motivated to visit that destination.
self-image will be motivated to visit that destination. Proposition 8a: Ideal self-congruity affects travel behav-
Proposition 7a: Actual self-congruity affects travel be- ior through the mediating effects of the need for
havior through the mediating effects of the need for self-esteem. That is, tourists who experience a match
self-consistency. That is, tourists who experience a between the visitor image of a destination and their
match between the visitor image of a destination and ideal self-image will be motivated to visit that desti-
their actual self-image will be motivated to visit that nation because doing so satisfies their need for
destination because doing so satisfies their need for self-esteem.
self-consistency.
The managerial implication of the ideal self-congruity
The managerial implication of this proposition is as fol- proposition is similar to the one discussed in relation to ac-
lows. Tourism managers can conduct a promotion campaign tual self-congruity. Tourism managers can conduct a promo-
showing a typical tourist reflective of the destination visitor tion campaign showing a typical tourist reflective of the des-
image. If the right destination visitor image is shown in the tination visitor image consistent with the majority of past
promotion materials, then a majority of the potential visitors tourists’ ideal self-image. To facilitate the experience of
are likely to experience actual self-congruity. To accentuate ideal self-congruity, the promotion could show the actor(s)
the experience of actual self-congruity, the promotion could expressing thoughts and feelings of ideal self-congruity. An
show the actor(s) expressing thoughts and feelings of actual example would be to show a person dreaming about being
self-congruity. An example would be to show a couple look- the typical person associated with the destination. Showing
ing at a brochure describing the destination site and saying, the dream in action is likely to accentuate the ideal self-con-
“This is the kind of place that people like us go to on a vaca- gruity experience.
tion.” Such expressions are likely to facilitate the experience Social self-congruity refers to the degree of match
of actual self-congruity. between a tourist’s social self-image and a destination visitor
Ideal self-congruity refers to the degree of match between image, or the fit between how tourists believe they are seen
a tourist ideal self-image (how tourists like to see them- by others in relation to the destination patron image. A per-
selves) and a destination visitor image. Ideal self-image is son may believe others see him or her as introverted and
also part of the private self. A person may see him- or herself plain. This social self-image may be consistent or inconsis-
as timid and lacking in confidence (actual self-image), yet tent with the actual self and the ideal self. Social self-image is
may not like this self-perception. He or she may want to part of the public self, not the private self. The social
become sensitive but self-assured (ideal self-image). There is self-image influences behavior through the social consis-
often a discrepancy between actual and ideal self. The ideal tency motive (e.g., Johar and Sirgy 1991; Sirgy, Johar, and
self motivates behavior through the need for self-esteem Claiborne 1992). People are motivated to maintain an image
(e.g., Grubb and Grathwohl 1967; Johar and Sirgy 1991; others have of them. They feel uncomfortable if they act in
Sirgy 1986; Sirgy, Johar, and Claiborne 1992). People have ways inconsistent with how they believe others see them. For
ideal images of themselves, and realizing these images example, a person may feel very uncomfortable visiting a

Downloaded from [Link] at University of Alabama at Birmingham on May 31, 2014

 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL RESEARCH 345

casino. This is because he fears he may run into people he think of her as an upscale person. She fears any of her friends
knows. He believes that others see him as “not the gambling and neighbors knowing that she stayed in a budget place
type and quite reserved.” Violating others’ perception of him because she believes that these friends and neighbors may
as “not being the gambling type and being quite reserved” is think less of her (see Figure 3).
likely to make him feel very uncomfortable. He feels the The effect of ideal social self-congruity on consumer be-
need to maintain social consistency (see Figure 3). havior has been documented through several studies done in
The effect of social self-congruity on consumer behavior the context of consumer goods. Specifically, several studies
has been documented through several studies done in the have demonstrated that product preference and ownership is
context of consumer goods. Specifically, several studies related to the degree of fit between the product’s user image
have shown that product preference and ownership is di- and a consumer’s ideal social self-image (Ericksen and Sirgy
rectly related to the degree of fit between a consumer’s social 1989, 1992; Sirgy 1979, 1980, 1983; Sirgy and Danes 1982).
self-image and the product-user image (Ericksen and Sirgy In travel and tourism research, several studies have found
1989, 1992; Malhotra 1981, 1988; Sirgy 1979, 1980, 1983; that going on a fashionable trip bestows honor and social rec-
Sirgy and Danes 1982). In the tourism and travel literature, ognition on the traveler (e.g., Coleman 1983; Crompton
research has found that tourists’ reference groups influence 1979; Graburn 1983; Matra 1984; Moeran 1983; Reimer
their destination choice (e.g., Mansfeld 1992; P. L. Pearce 1991; Riley 1995). For example, some people may think that
1982; Robinson 1979). Tourists tend to conform to the norms those who go to a ski resort in Europe or take a Mediterra-
of their reference groups. One can easily argue that the con- nean cruise are people with status and prestige. They are the
cepts of the social self, social self-congruity, and the need to “rich and powerful.”
maintain social consistency can explain the same behavioral
phenomenon. Thus, we propose the following. Proposition 10: Ideal social self-congruity affects travel
behavior. That is, tourists who experience a match be-
Proposition 9: Social self-congruity affects travel behav- tween the visitor image of a destination and their ideal
ior. That is, tourists who experience a match between social self-image will be motivated to visit that desti-
the visitor image of a destination and their social self- nation.
image will be motivated to visit that destination. Proposition 10a: Ideal social self-congruity affects travel
Proposition 9a: Social self-congruity affects travel be- behavior through the mediating effects of the need for
havior through the mediating effects of the need for social approval. That is, tourists who experience a
social consistency. That is, tourists who experience a match between the visitor image of a destination and
match between the visitor image of a destination and their ideal social self-image will be motivated to visit
their social self-image will be motivated to visit that that destination because doing so satisfies their need
destination because doing so satisfies their need for for social approval.
social consistency.
The managerial implication of the ideal social self-con-
The managerial implication of the social self-congruity gruity proposition is also somewhat similar to the one dis-
proposition is similar to the one discussed in relation to ac- cussed in relation to other forms of self-congruity. Tourism
tual self-congruity and ideal self-congruity. Tourism manag- managers can conduct a promotion campaign showing a typ-
ers can conduct a promotion campaign showing a typical ical tourist reflective of the destination visitor image consis-
tourist reflective of the destination visitor image consistent tent with the majority of past tourists’ ideal social self-image.
with the majority of past tourists’ social self-image. To facili- To facilitate the experience of ideal social self-congruity, the
tate the experience of social self-congruity, the promotion promotion could show the actor(s) expressing thoughts and
could show the actor(s) expressing thoughts and feelings of feelings of ideal social self-congruity. An example would be
social self-congruity. An example would be to show a person to show a married couple dreaming about going on a vacation
imagining himself at the destination site and commenting to ocean cruise and rubbing elbows with the elite. In the dream,
himself by saying, “This is the kind of place that people think the couple returns from their vacation and are received by
I would visit.” their neighbors and friends. Their neighbors and friends
Ideal social self-congruity refers to the degree of match praise and flatter them for being so “upscale.” Showing the
between a tourist’s ideal social self-image and a destination dream in action is likely to accentuate the ideal social
visitor image, or the fit between how tourists would like to be self-congruity experience.
seen by others in relation to the destination visitor image. The
ideal social self-image, like the social self-image, is part of
the public self. Patrons of upscale resorts with luxury facili- FACTORS AFFECTING THE ACTIVATION OF
ties may want to be seen by others as being classy. This is
their ideal social self-image. The ideal social self-image SELF-CONCEPT DIMENSIONS
affects people’s behavior through the social approval motive
(e.g., Johar and Sirgy 1991; Sirgy, Johar, and Claiborne Because self-congruity is essentially a concept of
1992). People are motivated to do things that would cause match/mismatch between tourists’ self-concept and destina-
others to think highly of them. By definition, acting in ways tion visitor image, factors that enhance the activation of a
that realize the ideal social self-image is likely to earn particular dimension of self concept are likely to influence
approval from others. Actions that are inconsistent with the travel behavior. Indeed, identifying these factors may help
ideal social self-image lead to social disapproval. Imagine an increase the predictiveness of the various subconstructs of
upscale female tourist who refuses to be seen in a budget self-congruity, namely, actual, ideal, social, and ideal social
bed-and-breakfast. She thinks that her friends and neighbors self-congruity. With respect to tourists’ self-image (actual,

Downloaded from [Link] at University of Alabama at Birmingham on May 31, 2014

346 MAY 2000

FIGURE 4 temporarily escape the stress of daily life by traveling to

FACTORS AFFECTING THE ACTIVATION those less-conspicuous destinations that more match their ac-
OF SELF-CONCEPT DIMENSIONS tual self-image. Based on the preceding discussion, we pro-
pose the following.

Proposition 11: Tourists’ preference/patronage of con-

spicuous destinations is likely to be influenced by
public self-type self-congruity (social self-congruity
and ideal social self-congruity) more so than by pri-
vate self-type congruence (actual self-congruity and
ideal self-congruity). Conversely, tourists’ prefer-
ence/patronage of inconspicuous destinations is
likely to be influenced by private self-type self-con-
gruity more so than by public self-type congruence.

ideal, social, and ideal social self-image), the question Tourism managers of inconspicuous destinations (i.e.,
becomes, “Under what conditions do private self-congruity well-known tourist destinations such as Key West in Florida
constructs such as actual self-congruity and ideal self-con- and the Bahamas in the Caribbean) are advised to promote
gruity predict destination patronage better than public their destination site by appealing to consumers’ public self.
self-congruity constructs—social self-congruity and ideal That is, the ad campaign has to show actors having personal
social self-congruity?” Factors that serve to activate a partic- characteristics that are consistent with the majority of target
ular motive (self-consistency, self-esteem, etc.) are likely to consumers’ social self-image and ideal social self-image.
induce a particular type of self-congruity. Example factors Conversely, a remote island that hardly anyone knows about
include characteristics related to destination visibility (or should be advertised with appeals to consumers’ actual
destination conspicuousness) or touring with others (or self-image and ideal self-image.
cotouring), as well as characteristics related to the individual
tourist, such as age and response mode (see Figure 4). Cotouring
Destination Conspicuousness Touring with significant others is another factor likely to
affect the predictiveness of public versus private self-type
Ross (1971) hypothesized that the predictiveness of pub- congruence (see Figure 4). Touring with others is likely to
lic versus private self-congruity constructs is a function of activate tourists’ needs for social approval and/or social con-
product conspicuousness. Product conspicuousness refers to sistency. In other words, people who tour with significant
the extent to which a product is consumed in public versus others may actively engage in impression management and,
private. For example, reading a sexually explicit magazine or therefore, patronize resorts and hotels that they believe may
a romantic-sensual novel tends to be done privately. Driving impress significant others, or at least avoid disconfirming the
a car, on the other hand, is done publicly. The private self (ac- expectations that significant others have of them. People tour
tual and ideal) should predict brand preference for less con- with significant others, in part, to make a good impression
spicuous products better than for more conspicuous prod- (Kiecker and Hartman 1993). Therefore, we hypothesize that
ucts. Conversely, the public self (social and ideal social) when touring with significant others, the traveler is likely to
should be more predictive of preference for conspicuous than choose to visit those destinations that would make a good im-
inconspicuous products. Other researchers have echoed the pression on cotouring others. Choosing appropriate facilities
same hypothesis in consumer goods studies (e.g., Hong and (e.g., accommodation, transportation) that are consistent
Zinkhan 1995; Martin and Bellizzi 1982; Sirgy 1979). We with the social self-image or ideal social self-image is a sig-
believe that this hypothesis has logical appeal and could eas- nificant way to satisfy the needs of social consistency and so-
ily be applied to explain and predict travel behavior. Here, cial approval. Based on this logic, we propose the following.
we develop a construct called destination conspicuousness.
A conspicuous destination is a destination in which tourists Proposition 12: Destination preference/patronage is
believe they can be observed and/or judged by significant likely to be influenced by public self-type self-con-
others. Significant others are friends, relatives, neighbors, as- gruity (social self-congruity and ideal social self-con-
sociates, coworkers, and others whom tourists care to im- gruity) more so than private self-type congruence (ac-
press (e.g., Johar and Sirgy 1991). For example, many tour- tual self-congruity and ideal self-congruity) when
ists may feel that popular upscale resorts are much more tourists tour with significant others. Conversely, des-
conspicuous than budget bed-and-breakfasts, which tend to tination preference/patronage is likely to be influ-
be buried in anonymous places. Tourists are more likely to enced by private self-type self-congruity more so than
feel that their relatives, neighbors, friends, and so on would public self-type congruence when tourists tour alone.
think highly of them visiting well-known upscale resorts
over less prestigious destinations. Prestige has been shown to The managerial implications of this proposition are as
be linked with “inversionary” leisure travel—people are follows. Tourism managers of destinations typically visited
treated like “royalty” by the hosts, even when they occupy by couples or tourist groups are advised to promote their des-
low social positions in their daily lives (Riley 1995). Some tination site by appealing to consumers’ public self. That is,
people tend to make their yearly family trips to famous re- the ad campaign has to show actors having personal charac-
sorts that match their ideal social self-image, whereas they teristics that are consistent with a majority of target consum-

Downloaded from [Link] at University of Alabama at Birmingham on May 31, 2014

 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL RESEARCH 347

ers’ social self-image and ideal social self-image. Con- Response Mode
versely, destinations typically visited by individual travelers
(e.g., single people want to escape from the world of work) Sirgy (1987) conducted two studies that supported the
should be advertised with appeals to consumers’ actual notion that the activation of actual self-image versus ideal
self-image and ideal self-image. self-image in self-congruity processing is dependent on con-
sumers’ response mode. Response mode refers to whether
the decision is a preference judgment type or a brand choice.
Age It was argued that the need for self-esteem is more likely to
Age may help explain and predict the extent to which be activated in judgment-type decisions (e.g., preference)
tourists engage in public-self versus private-self information than in choice-type decisions (e.g., actual purchase). Con-
processing (see Figure 4). One can easily observe the fact versely, the need for self-consistency is more likely to be
that children and younger people are much more preoccupied activated in choice-type decisions. Because the need for
with impression management than older people. This is self-esteem is the underlying motivational state involved in
because children and young people are in the process of ideal self-congruity, one can logically infer that ideal self-
forming their private conceptions of themselves (private congruity would play a significant role in consumer behavior
self-concept). Because we are social creatures, our private when the decision is a brand preference. The same can be
self-concept is shaped mostly from social encounters. There- said for the need for self-consistency. That is, because self-
fore, developmentally speaking, children and young people consistency motivation is involved in actual self-congruity,
in general have a stronger sense of public self than private one can expect actual self-congruity to be more evident in
self. Mature people, on the other hand, are likely to have a choice-type decisions (cf. Hong and Zinkhan 1995; Varvoglis
consolidated sense of private self, not different from that of 1987).
the public self. Using this reasoning, one may surmise that For example, a working-class consumer who sees an ad
children’s decisions and actions are more likely to be influ- about a “sun” resort in the Caribbean may judge the destina-
enced by public than private self-type of congruence, tion as positive and develop a positive attitude toward the
whereas adults’ decisions and actions are more likely to be destination. This may be due to the notion that this consumer
influenced by the private self (which in one sense incorpo- may feel that the Caribbean resort is an upscale destination.
rates and is consistent with the public self). Hence, she would like to see herself as upscale (match be-
Indeed, research in travel and tourism has identified age tween the destination visitor image and her ideal self-image
as an important factor that affects tourists’ choices of desti- as being upscale). The guiding source of motivation is the
nations and activities (e.g., Mansfeld 1992; Vogt 1978). For need for self-esteem. Imagining herself touring at the Carib-
example, young tourists place more importance on activities bean sun resort gives her a boost of self-esteem. How would
that are prestige worthy or symbolize their novelty and diver- she feel if she actually decides to visit the destination? She is
sity, whereas mature tourists tend to be more practical, and likely to feel uncomfortable because finding herself in such a
emphasize the facilities of a destination site—all of which place would be inconsistent with her own personal identity.
suggests a moderation of age on the relationship between In other words, the driving force of her decision not to visit
type of self-congruity and travel behavior. Specifically, the destination is the self-consistency motive. Therefore, we
young tourists place more importance on prestige, novelty, put forth the following theoretical proposition.
and diversity of destination sites because doing so satisfies
their needs for social consistency and social approval. Ma- Proposition 14: Tourists’ destination preference decisions
ture tourists, on the other hand, emphasize the facilities of are likely to be influenced by enhancement-type
destination sites because they tend to be concerned with sat- self-congruity (ideal self-congruity and ideal social
isfying needs for self-consistency and self-esteem rather than self-congruity) more so than consistency-type congru-
social consistency and social approval. Therefore, we put ence (actual self-congruity and social self-congruity).
forth the following theoretical proposition. Conversely, tourists’ destination patronage decisions
are likely to be affected by consistency-type self-con-
Proposition 13: Young tourists’ destination prefer- gruity more so than enhancement-type congruence.
ence/patronage decisions are likely to be influenced
by public self-type self-congruity (social self-congru- The managerial implications of this proposition are as
ity and ideal social self-congruity) more so than pri- follows. Tourism marketers should use different elements of
vate self-type congruence (actual self-congruity and the promotion mix to be most effective. Appeals to the ideal
ideal self-congruity). Conversely, mature tourists’ and ideal social self should be the guiding theme of mass me-
destination preference/patronage decisions are likely dia advertising. In contrast, sales promotion materials should
to be affected by private self-type self-congruity more include appeals to the actual and social self. This is because
so than public self-type congruence. the goal of sales promotion is patronage, whereas the goal of
advertising is merely attitudinal.
The managerial implications of this proposition are simi-
lar to the managerial implications of the last two proposi-
tions. Tourism managers targeting young travelers should pro- INTERRELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
mote their destination site by appealing to consumers’ public
self. That is, the ad campaign has to show actors having per-
SELF-CONGRUITY AND FUNCTIONAL
sonal characteristics that are consistent with a majority of tar- CONGRUITY
get consumers’ social self-image and ideal social self- image.
Conversely, targeting an older crowd necessitates appeals to As described in this article, self-congruity is tourists’
consumers’ actual self-image and ideal self-image. comparison between their destination visitor image and their
Downloaded from [Link] at University of Alabama at Birmingham on May 31, 2014
348 MAY 2000

own self-image. Functional congruity, on the other hand, is FIGURE 5

based on the perceived utilitarian aspects of the product (ser- MODERATOR EFFECTS AFFECTING THE
vice) in reference to some ideal aspects (e.g., Sirgy and Johar RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SELF-CONGRUITY
1985a, 1985b). For example, in destination selection, a tour- (FUNCTIONAL CONGRUITY) AND TRAVEL BEHAVIOR
ist may consider the proximity of the resort from his or her
residence, the price range of alternative resort facilities, the
quality of the services the resort carries, the variety of activi-
ties, and/or the possible use of credit cards. These evaluative
criteria are utilitarian or functional in nature in comparison to
symbolic criteria such as destination visitor image. Func-
tional congruity traditionally has been captured (operation-
ally speaking) using multiattribute attitude indexes (e.g.,
Sirgy and Samli 1985).
It has been suggested that both functional congruity and
self-congruity influence tourism motivation and destination
travel (e.g., Blank 1989; Chon and Olsen 1991; Dann 1981;
Riley 1995), but the relative weights given to each may
depend on a number of situational- and tourist-related char-
acteristics. This is because functional congruity, as a psycho-
logical evaluation process, may require greater cognitive
effort than self-congruity. For example, experienced tourists novice consumers (Alba and Hutchinson 1987; Brucks 1985;
may evaluate a vacation resort based on its focal attractions, Sujan 1985). For example, Brucks (1985) found that con-
hospitality services, supplementary recreational opportuni- sumers with high prior knowledge tended to exert more ef-
ties, and so on. This is because experienced tourists are likely fort in acquiring new information. Because the information
to be more motivated and able to evaluate these utilitarian used in this study concerned utilitarian attributes, this finding
attributes. In contrast, tourists who have little experience suggests that prior knowledge may facilitate the processing
may evaluate resorts based on simple decision cues, such as of utilitarian attributes. Similarly, Sujan (1985) suggested
self-congruity (i.e., “Would similar people tour here?”). that novices are likely to base their evaluations on rather sim-
Consistent with this logic, a number of models in social plistic criteria, whereas experts are likely to exhibit more
psychology and consumer behavior research point to the con- product-related thoughts. Because tourists with low prior
tingent nature of consumers’ information processing (e.g., knowledge of destinations may not be able to evaluate utili-
Cohen and Basu 1987; Sujan 1985). Petty and Cacioppo’s tarian destination attributes, they may rely on evaluations of
(1986) elaboration likelihood model and Chaiken’s (1980) more “simplistic” cues, such as destination visitor image.
heuristic-systematic model distinguish between persuasion And, because knowledge is likely to facilitate processing of
that results from careful consideration of message content utilitarian attributes, tourists with more prior knowledge are
(central or systematic processing) and persuasion based on likely to engage in functional congruity processing to evalu-
an assessment of more superficial cues (peripheral or heuris- ate a destination (Johar and Sirgy 1991).
tic processing). Central or systematic processing is generally
seen as requiring greater cognitive effort than peripheral or Proposition 15: The relationship between self-congruity
heuristic processing. Therefore, such processing is likely to and travel behavior is moderated by tourists’ level of
require greater ability and motivation to process information. knowledge. Specifically, the effect of self-congruity
Because functional congruity is more likely to require cogni- on travel behavior is likely to be greater for tourists
tive effort than is self-congruity, utilitarian cues are likely to with less knowledge than for tourists with more
be centrally processed. In contrast, symbolic cues, such as knowledge.
destination visitor image, are likely to be processed peripher-
ally. Based on this argument, we propose that self-congruity The managerial implications here are obvious. Tourism
influences functional congruity, and the predictive effects of managers targeting consumers with low knowledge about the
self-congruity versus functional congruity are moderated by tourist destination should avoid the use of technical informa-
tourists’ knowledge, prior experience, involvement, and time tion. The ad campaign should be value expressive instead,
pressure (see Figure 5). that is, appeal to consumers’ self-concept.

Knowledge Prior Experience

A number of factors, such as ability and motivation to With respect to prior experience, one recent study exam-
process information, are seen to affect the likelihood that ined how prior experience moderated the relationships be-
consumers will engage in central/systematic versus peripheral/ tween value-expressive and utilitarian criteria and brand atti-
heuristic processing—or, in this case, the extent to which tudes. Mangleburg et al. (1998) found that user-image-based
tourists will engage in functional congruity versus self-con- cues had a greater effect on brand attitude for less experi-
gruity processing in evaluating destinations. One factor enced versus more experienced consumers, but that utilitar-
likely to affect tourists’ use of functional congruity versus ian cues generally had a greater effect on brand attitude for
self-congruity in evaluating destinations is tourists’ level of more experienced versus less experienced consumers. Simi-
knowledge about tourism and destinations. Research in con- larly, Wood and Kallgren (1988) reasoned that experienced
sumer behavior suggests that knowledgeable or expert con- participants would have attitude-relevant information acces-
sumers are likely to process information differently than sible in memory more than those with little experience.
Downloaded from [Link] at University of Alabama at Birmingham on May 31, 2014
 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL RESEARCH 349

Therefore, less experienced participants would be more per- rather than informational advertising. Conversely, the ad
suaded by nonmessage cues (e.g., source liking and exper- campaign should be informational given that the consumers
tise), and more experienced participants would be more per- are highly involved.
suaded by message content. Results generally supported this
line of reasoning. A similar process is likely to occur with re- Time Pressure
spect to destination attitude and patronage. That is, tourists
who are more experienced may focus on utilitarian-based Time pressure may also moderate the extent to which
criteria when evaluating destinations (e.g., functional con- tourists focus on utilitarian versus value-expressive criteria
gruity), whereas tourists who lack experience may focus on in travel decisions. Tourists who experience greater time
holistic, image-based cues, such as self-congruity (Johar and pressure may not be able to engage in the in-depth processing
Sirgy 1991). required of functional congruity, that is, to evaluate a desti-
nation on a number of utilitarian attributes. Instead,
Proposition 16: The relationship between self-congruity time-pressured tourists may focus on more holistic criteria,
and travel behavior is moderated by tourists’ level of such as whether people similar to them tour in that destina-
touring experience. Specifically, the effect of self- tion, and whether they feel comfortable touring there. For ex-
congruity on travel behavior is likely to be greater for ample, a person trying to decide where to go for a vacation at
tourists with less experience than for tourists with the last minute may select a destination based on its image.
more experience. The tourist may say to herself, “People like my friend and
myself usually tour here; this is our kind of destination,”
Similar to the last proposition, the managerial implica- rather than evaluate the destination’s individual utilitarian at-
tions of this proposition are obvious. Tourism managers tar- tributes. This is a decision heuristic considered to be less
geting consumers with low experience with the destination cognitively taxing and less time consuming compared with
site should avoid the use of informational advertising. The ad other decision processes such as functional congruity.
campaign should be value expressive instead, that is, appeal
to consumers’ self-concept. Proposition 18: The relationship between self-congruity
and travel behavior is moderated by tourists’ time
Involvement pressure. The effects of self-congruity are likely to be
greater for tourists who experience greater time pres-
Research also suggests that involvement influences in- sure in comparison with those who experience little
formation processing. For example, Petty, Cacioppo, and time pressure.
Schumann (1983) found that under conditions of high prod-
uct involvement, argument quality had a greater effect on The managerial implications here are as follows. Tourism
brand attitude. Manipulations of product endorser, however, managers targeting consumers who have to make immediate
had a greater effect on brand attitude under conditions of low decisions about whether to take advantage of a travel oppor-
product involvement. Involvement is likely to perform a sim- tunity should do this through value-expressive advertising,
ilar moderating role in a travel context. Because functional not informational advertising. Conversely, informational ad-
congruity is a more cognitively taxing, piecemeal-oriented vertising may work better with consumers who have much
process, it is likely to require a greater level of motivation, or time to decide.
involvement, on the part of tourists. Tourists who have little
involvement with touring are likely to lack the motivation to Self-Congruity Bias
engage in this sort of processing and, therefore, may base
preferences and destination patronage decisions on evalua- Sirgy et al. (1991) were able to demonstrate that func-
tions of less cognitively taxing and more holistic and simplis- tional congruity is a stronger predictor of consumer behavior
tic criteria, such as self-congruity (Johar and Sirgy 1991). than self-congruity. Furthermore, functional congruity has
For example, consider a family trying to decide where to go been found to explain consumer satisfaction better than
for a vacation. Let us assume that the mother is likely to be self-congruity in a tourism context (Chon and Olsen 1991).
most involved. She is the one who will expend the time and However, the evidence also suggested that self-congruity
energy to arrange the trip and take care of the logistics. Be- “biases” functional congruity. That is, consumers who expe-
cause of her high involvement, she is likely to consider many rience high self-congruity tend to favorably process the utili-
factors, both symbolic and utilitarian, in selecting a destina- tarian product attributes, and vice versa. It stands to reason
tion. However, the father and kids, because of their lesser in- that tourists who perceive a destination to match their actual,
volvement, are likely to focus on symbolic factors alone, for ideal, social, and/or ideal social self-image may form an ini-
example, the kind of people that visit destinations x, y, and z. tial favorable attitude toward the destination. Essentially,
this is what social psychologists refer to as “first impres-
Proposition 17: The relationship between self-congruity sion.” This first impression biases further information pro-
and travel behavior is moderated by tourists’ involve- cessing. Thus, if the first impression is positive, then it is
ment with destinations and touring. The effects of self- likely that further information processing may be biased in
congruity on travel behavior are likely to be greater the positive direction (cf. Varvoglis and Sirgy 1984). The
for tourists who are not very involved with touring in converse is also true.
comparison with those who are very involved.
Proposition 19: Self-congruity biases functional congru-
The managerial implications here are as follows. Tourism ity. That is, tourists who experience a match between
managers targeting consumers who are not highly involved the destination visitor image and their self-concept
with the tourist destination should use value-expressive are likely to process the utilitarian attributes in a fa-
Downloaded from [Link] at University of Alabama at Birmingham on May 31, 2014
350 MAY 2000

vorable light, thus increasing the likelihood of form- self-image congruence only in consumer goods and services
ing an overall favorable attitude toward the destina- settings. The new method of measuring self-congruity ap-
tion. Those who experience a mismatch are likely to plied in a tourism context can be exemplified as follows. Par-
process the utilitarian attributes in an unfavorable ticipants are instructed to
light, thus increasing the likelihood of forming an un-
favorable attitude. Take a moment to think about [destination x]. Think
about the kind of person who typically visits [destina-
The managerial implications here are as follows. Tourism tion x]. Imagine this tourist in your mind and then de-
managers should use both value-expressive and informa- scribe this person using one or more personal adjec-
tional elements in promotion. The visual aspects of the ad tives such as classy, poor, stylish, masculine, sexy,
copy should appeal to consumers’ self-concept, whereas the old, athletic, or whatever personal adjectives you can
informational aspects of the body copy should focus on the use to describe the typical visitor of [destination x].
utilitarian benefits of the destination site. The visual aspects Once you’ve done this, indicate your agreement or
of the ad copy are likely to cause readers to process those in- disagreement to the following statement:
formational aspects favorably; that is, readers are apt to form “This [destination x] is consistent with how I see my-
a positive attitude toward the destination site. self” (actual self-image).
“This [destination x] is consistent with how I like to
see myself” (ideal self-image).
MEASURES AND METHODS OF
“This [destination x] is consistent with how I believe
SELF-CONGRUITY others see me” (social self-image).
“This [destination x] is consistent with how I would
There are two primary methods of measuring self-image like others to see me” (ideal social self-image).
congruence (Sirgy et al. 1997). The traditional method of
measuring self-congruity is based on tapping participants’ Participants would then mark their response on a Likert-type
perceptions of destination visit image and participants’ per- scale in relation to the last four self-image statements. Sirgy
ceptions of their self-image in relation to the destination et al. (1997) argued that this method does not cue participants
patron image. Then, a discrepancy or ratio score with each to a specific image category or dimension. The method cues
image dimension is mathematically computed, and the dis- participants to conjure up their own image of the destination
crepancy scores are summed across all dimensions. Indeed, visitor. Then, the method guides them to indicate their global
most studies in consumer self-concept research (in relation to perception of degree of match or mismatch between how
consumer goods and services) have measured self-congruity they see themselves (self-image) and the destination patron
using some kind of mathematical discrepancy index between image. In other words, this measurement procedure captures
consumer self-concept and the product-user image (for liter- self-congruity directly (not by measuring destination visitor
ature reviews, see Claiborne and Sirgy 1990; Sirgy 1982, image and self-image separately) and globally (not by asking
1985a; Sirgy et al. 1997). For example, the following mathe- participants to indicate their perception of congruity with
matical index involving the sum of absolute discrepancy predetermined images). As such, the new method assumes
scores is commonplace: that self-image congruence is processed holistically or glob-
n
ally, not analytically or piecemeal as the traditional method
∑|P − S | ,
i i
assumed. In comparing the predictive validity of the new
i =1 method with that of the traditional method, the new method
was found to be more predictive of various consumer behav-
where Pi is the rating of destination visitor image along im- iors and attitudes across six different studies.
age dimension i and Si is the rating of self-image along image With respect to the managerial utility of this method,
dimension i. tourism researchers can use overall self-congruity scores to
It should be noted that self and destination visitor image segment markets into groups of tourists who experience con-
dimensions can be measured using semantic differential scales gruity versus those who do not. In addition, researchers can
or Likert-type scales. These measures are mostly tailor- easily compute descriptive statistics (e.g., means and stan-
made, that is, the image dimensions are elicited as a function dard deviations) for each verbally stated image. Similar pro-
of the destination in question (e.g., Sirgy and Samli 1985). files can be constructed in relation to competing destinations.
Despite the prevalence of the traditional method of mea- Thus, tourism managers can identify the most congruent
suring self-image congruence, Sirgy et al. (1997) identified images of their destinations and competing destinations and
methodological problems inherent in the discrepancy score take action accordingly.
measure of self-congruity. They argued that this method is
besieged with three key problems: (1) the use of discrepancy
scores, (2) the possible use of irrelevant images, and (3) the NOTE
use of a compensatory decision rule. These problems relate,
in part, to the assumption that self-congruity is a multidimen- 1. Before turning to this discussion, however, it should be noted
sional, piecemeal process. To address these limitations, that travel behavior as used here reflects a number of related as-
Sirgy et al. (1997) designed a new method to measure pects, which may include destination attitude, destination prefer-
self-image congruence; however, their research focused on ence, destination choice, actual or intended visit to a destination,

Downloaded from [Link] at University of Alabama at Birmingham on May 31, 2014

 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL RESEARCH 351

satisfaction with a destination, repeat visit to a destination, and des- Grubb, E. L., and B. L. Stern (1971). “Self-Concept and Significant Others.”
tination loyalty. Journal of Marketing Research, 8: 382-85.
Holloway, J. C., and R. V. Plant (1988). Marketing for Tourism. London:
Pitman.
Hong, Jae W., and George M. Zinkhan (1995). “Self-Concept and Advertis-
ing Effectiveness: The Influence of Congruency, Conspicuousness,
REFERENCES and Response Mode.” Psychology and Marketing, 12: 53-77.
Hsieh, S., and J. T. O’Leary (1994). “A Travel Decision Model for Japanese
Pleasure Travel.” In Tourism: The Economy’s Silver Lining. Travel
Alba, J. W., and J. W. Hutchinson (1987). “Dimensions of Consumer Exper- and Tourism Research Association, pp. 94-104.
tise.” Journal of Consumer Research, 13: 411-54. Hu, Y., and B. Ritchie (1993). “Measuring Destination Attractiveness: A
Allport, G. W. (1943). Becoming: Basic Considerations for a Psychology of Contextual Approach.” Journal of Travel Research, 32 (2): 25-34.
Personality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Hughes, G. D., and J. L. Guerrero (1971). “Automobile Self-Congruity
Amin, S. (1979). Classe et nation. Paris: Les Edition. Models Reexamined.” Journal of Marketing Research, 9: 125-27.
Ascher, F. (1985). Tourism: Transnational Corporations and Cultural Iden- Jackson, G. (1973). “A Preliminary Bicultural Study of Value Orientations
tities. Paris: UNESCO. and Leisure Attitudes.” Journal of Leisure Research, 5: 10-20.
Backman, S., and J. Crompton (1991). “Differentiating between High, Spu- James, William (1890). The Principles of Psychology. New York: Holt.
rious, Latent, and Low Loyalty Participants in Two Leisure Activ- Johar, J. S., and Joseph M. Sirgy (1991). “Value Expressive versus Utilitar-
ities.” Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 9 (2): 1-17. ian Appeals: When and Why to Use Which Appeal.” Journal of Adver-
Backman, S., and C. Veldkamp (1995). “Examination of the Relationship tising, 20 (3): 23-34.
between Service Quality and User Loyalty.” Journal of Park and Rec- Kiecker, Pamela, and Cathy L. Hartman (1993). “Purchase Pal Use: Why
reation Administration, 13 (2): 29-41. Buyers Choose to Shop with Others.” In 1993 AMA Winter Educators’
Beatty, S. E., L. R. Kahle, P. Homer, and S. Misra (1990). “Alternative Mea- Conference Proceedings. Chicago: American Marketing Association,
surement Approaches to Consumer Values: The List of Values and the pp. 378-84.
Rokeach Value Survey.” Psychology and Marketing, 2: 181-99. Klenosky, D. B., E. G. Charles, and M. Michael (1993). “Understanding the
Belch, G. E., and E. L. Landon, Jr. (1977). “Discriminant Validity of a Prod- Factors Influencing Ski Destination Choice: A Means-End Analytic
uct-Anchored Self-Concept Measure.” Journal of Marketing Re- Approach.” Journal of Leisure Research, 24: 362-79.
search, 14: 252-56. Landon, E. L. (1974). “Self-Concept, Ideal Self-Concept and Consumer
Bellenger, Danny N., Earle Steinberg, and Wilbur W. Stanton (1976). “The Purchase Intentions.” Journal of Consumer Research, 1: 44-51.
Congruence of Store Image and Self Image.” Journal of Retailing, 52: Lawson, R., J. Gnoth, and K. Paulin (1995). “Tourists’ Awareness of Prices
17-32. for Attraction and Activities.” Journal of Travel Research, 34 (1):
Birdwell, A. E. (1968). “A Study of Influence of Image Congruence on Con- 3-10.
sumer Choice.” Journal of Business, 41: 76-88. Lecky, P. (1945). Self-Consistency: A Theory of Personality. New York: Is-
Blank, U. (1989). The Community Tourism Industry Imperative: The Neces- land Press.
sity, the Opportunities, Its Potential. State College, PA: Venture. Malhotra, N. K. (1981). “A Scale to Measure Self-Concepts, Person Con-
Brucks, Merrie (1985). “The Effects of Product Class Knowledge on Infor- cepts and Product Concepts.” Journal of Marketing Research, 18:
mation Search Behavior.” Journal of Consumer Research, 12: 1-16. 454-64.
Chaiken, Shelley (1980). “Heuristic versus Systematic Information Pro-  (1988). “Self-Concept and Product Choice: An Integrated Perspec-
cessing and the Use of Source versus Message Cues in Persuasion.” tive.” Journal of Economic Psychology, 9: 1-28.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39: 752-66. Mangleburg, Tamara, Joseph M. Sirgy, Dhruv Grewal, Maria Hatzios,
Chon, K. (1990). “The Role of Destination Image in Tourism: A Review and Danny Axsom, and Trina Bogel (1998). “The Moderating Effect of
Discussion.” The Tourist Review, 45 (2): 2-9. Prior Experience in Consumers’ Use of User-Image Based versus Util-
 (1992). “Self-Image/Destination-Image Congruity.” Annals of itarian Cues in Brand Attitude.” Journal of Business and Psychology,
Tourism Research, 19: 360-63. 13 (1): 101-13.
Chon, K., and M. D. Olsen (1991). “Functional and Symbolic Congruity Ap- Mansfeld, Y. (1992). Tourism: Toward a Behavioral Approach. Oxford:
proaches to Consumer Satisfaction/Dissatisfaction in Tourism.” Jour- Pergamon Press.
nal of the International Academy of Hospitality Research, 3. Markus, H., and P. Nurius (1986). “Possible Selves.” American Psycholo-
Claiborne, C. B., and Joseph Sirgy (1990). “Self-Congruity as a Model of gist, 4: 954-69.
Attitude Formation and Change: Conceptual Review and Guide for Martin, Warren, and Joseph Bellizzi (1982). “Analysis of Congruous Rela-
Future Research.” In Developments in Marketing Science, Vol. 13, ed- tionships between Self-Images and Product Images.” Journal of Acad-
ited by B. J. Dunlap. Cullowhee, NC: Academy of Marketing Science, emy of Marketing Science, 10: 473-89.
pp. 1-7. Mathieson, A., and G. Wall (1982). Tourism—Economic, Physical, and So-
Cohen, Joel B., and Kunal Basu (1987). “Alternative Models of Categoriza- cial Impacts. New York: Longman.
tion: Toward a Contingent Processing Framework.” Journal of Con- Matra, J. (1984). Social Inequality, Stratification, and Mobility. Englewood
sumer Research 13: 455-72. Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Coleman, R. (1983). “The Continuing Significance of Social Class to Mar- Mazanec, J. (1994). “Consumer Behavior.” In Travel, Tourism and Hospi-
keting.” Journal of Consumer Research, 10: 265-80. tality Research, edited by J.R.B. Ritchie and C. R. Goeldner. New
Cooley, C. H. (1902). Human Nature and the Social Order. New York: York: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 294-99.
Charles Scribner and Sons. McIntosh, R. W., C. R. Goeldner, and J.R.B. Ritchie (1995). Tourism: Prin-
Crompton, J. (1979). “Motivations for Pleasure Vacation.” Annals of Tour- ciples, Practices, Philosophies. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
ism Research, 6: 404-24. Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, Self, and Society. Chicago: Chicago University
Dann, G. (1981). “Tourism Motivation: An Appraisal.” Annals of Tourism Press.
Research, 9: 187-219. Milman, A., and A. Pizam (1995). “The Role of Awareness and Familiarity
Echtner, C., and J.R.B. Ritchie (1991). “The Meaning and Measurement of with a Destination: The Central Florida Case.” Journal of Travel Re-
Destination Image.” Journal of Tourism Studies, 2: 2-12. search, 33 (3): 21-27.
 (1993). “The Measurement of Destination Image: An Empirical As- Moeran, B. (1983). “The Language of Japanese Tourism.” Annals of Tour-
sessment.” Journal of Travel Research, 32 (4): 3-14. ism Research 10: 93-108.
Ericksen, Mary Kay, and Joseph M. Sirgy (1989). “Achievement Motiva- Ostrowski, P., T. O’Brien, and G. Gordon (1993). “Service Quality and
tion and Clothing Behavior of Working Women: A Self-Congruity Consumer Loyalty in the Commercial Airline Industry.” Journal of
Analysis.” Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 4: 307-26. Travel Research, 32: 16-24.
 (1992). “Employed Females’ Clothing Preference, Self-Congruity, Palmer, A., and D. Bejou (1995). “Tourism Destination Marketing Alli-
and Career Anchorage.” Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22: ances.” Annals of Tourism Research, 3: 616-29.
208-222. Pearce, G. D. (1989). Tourist Development. Burnt Mill, NY: Longman.
Gartner, W. C. (1989). “Tourism Image: Attribute Measurement of State Pearce, P. L. (1982). The Social Psychology of Tourist Behavior. Oxford:
Tourism Products Using Multidimensional Scaling Techniques.” Pergamon Press.
Journal of Travel Research, 28 (2): 16-20. Petty, R., and J. T. Cacioppo (1986). Communication and Persuasion: Cen-
 (1993). “Image Formation Process.” Journal of Travel & Tourism tral and Peripheral Routes to Attitude Change. New York:
Marketing, 2: 191-215. Springer-Verlag.
Graburn, N. (1983). “The Anthropology of Tourism.” Annals of Tourism Petty, R., J. T. Cacioppo, and D. Schumann (1983). “Central and Peripheral
Research, 10: 9-13. Routes to Advertising Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of Involve-
Gray, J. (1986). “Marketing to Tourism.” Speech to Northeast Missouri ment.” Journal of Consumer Research, 10: 135-46.
Travel and Conference, Hannibal. Pizam, A., and R. Calantone (1987). “Beyond Psychographics—Values as
Grubb, E. L., and H. L. Grathwohl (1967). “Consumer Self-Concept, Sym- Determinants of Tourist Behavior.” International Journal of Hospital-
bolism, and Market Behavior: A Theoretical Approach.” Journal of ity Management, 6: 177-81.
Marketing, 31: 22-27. Reimer, G. (1991). “Packaging Dreams: Canadian Tour Operators at
Grubb, E. L., and G. Hupp (1968). “Perception of Self, Generalized Stereo- Work.” Annals of Tourism Research, 18: 501-12.
types, and Brand Selection.” Journal of Marketing Research, 5: 58-63.

Downloaded from [Link] at University of Alabama at Birmingham on May 31, 2014

352 MAY 2000

Riley, R. W. (1995). “Prestige Worthy Tourist Behavior.” Annals of Tour- Sirgy, M. Joseph, and J. S. Johar (1985a). “Measures of Product Value-Ex-
ism Research, 22: 630-49. pressiveness: An Initial Test of Reliability and Validity.” In Proceed-
Robinson, H. (1979). A Geography of Tourism. London: Macdonald and ings of the Division of Consumer Psychology, American
Evans. Psychological Association, 1985 Annual Convention, edited by
Ross, I. (1971). “Self-Concept and Brand Preference.” Journal of Business Wayne D. Hoyer. Northridge: California State University, pp. 99-103.
of the University of Chicago, 44: 38-50.  (1985b). “Self-Congruity Models versus Multiattribute Attitude
Senior, G. (1987). “How to Target Customers Effectively.” Travel Trade Models: When to Use Which Positioning Model.” In 1985 AMA Edu-
Gazette, 15. cators Proceedings, edited by Robert F. Lusch, Gary T. Ford, Gary L.
Seyhmus, B., and D. Brinberg (1997). “Affective Images of Tourism Desti- Frazier, Roy D. Howell, Charles A. Ingene, Michael Reilly, and Ron-
nation.” Journal of Travel Research, 35 (3): 11-15. ald W. Stampf. Chicago: American Marketing Association, pp. 11-15.
Sheldon, P. J., and J. Mark (1987). “The Demand for Package Tours: A Sirgy, M. Joseph, J. S. Johar, and C. B. Claiborne (1992). “Self-Concept
Mode Choice Model.” Journal of Travel Research, 24: 16-23. Motivation as Mediator between Self-Congruity and Attitude/Inten-
Sirgy, M. Joseph (1979). “Self-Concept in Consumer Behavior.” Ph.D. the- tion.” In Developments in Marketing Science, Vol. 15, edited by V. L.
sis, Department of Psychology, University of Massachusetts at Critten. Chestnut Hill, MA: Academy of Marketing Science, pp.
Amherst. 402-6.
 (1980). “Self Concept in Relation to Product Preference and Pur- Sirgy, M. Joseph, J. S. Johar, A. C. Samli, and C. B. Claiborne (1991).
chase Intention.” In Developments in Marketing Science, Vol. 3, ed- “Self-Congruity versus Functional Congruity: Predictors of Consumer
ited by V. V. Bellur. Marquette, MI: Academy of Marketing Science, Behavior.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 19: 363-75.
pp. 350-54. Sirgy, M. Joseph, and A. C. Samli (1985). “A Path Analytic Model of Store
 (1982). “Self-Concept in Consumer Behavior: A Critical Review.” Loyalty Involving Self-Concept, Store Image, Socioeconomic Status,
Journal of Consumer Research, 9: 287-300. and Geographic Loyalty.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Sci-
 (1983). “Self-Image/Product-Image Congruity and Product Prefer- ence, 13: 265-91.
ence versus Purchase Intention: A Role Playing Experiment.” In Pro- Sujan, M. (1985). “Consumer Knowledge: Effects on Evaluation Strategies
ceedings of the Division 23 Program, 90th Annual Convention of the Mediating Consumer Judgments.” Journal of Consumer Research, 12:
American Psychological Association, edited by Michael Mazis. Wash- 32-46.
ington, DC: American Psychological Association, pp. 5-9. Telisman-Kosuta, N. (1989). “Tourist Destination Image.” In The Tourism
 (1985a). “Self-Image/Product Image Congruity and Consumer De- Marketing and Management Handbook, edited by S. F. Witt and L.
cision Making.” International Journal of Management, 2 (4): 49-63. Moutinho. London: Prentice Hall, pp. 555-61.
 (1985b). “Using Self-Congruity and Ideal Congruity to Predict Pur- Varvoglis, T. (1987). “Activation of Self-Image in a Store Setting and Dur-
chase Motivation.” Journal of Business Research, 13: 195-206. ing Television Viewing.” Ph.D. dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic In-
 (1986). Self-Congruity: Toward a Theory of Personality and Cyber- stitute and State University, Blacksburg.
netics. New York: Praeger. Varvoglis, T., and M. J. Sirgy (1984). “The Interrelationship between Utili-
 (1987). “The Moderating Role of Response Mode in Consumer tarian and Value-Expressive Store Image Attributes.” In Develop-
Self-Esteem/Self-Consistency Effects.” In 1987 AMA Winter Educa- ments in Marketing Science, Vol. 7, edited by Jay D. Lindquist.
tors Conference, edited by Russell Belk et al. Chicago: American Mar- Kalamazoo, MI: Academy of Marketing Science, pp. 27-31.
keting Association, pp. 50-55. Vladimir, A. (1989). The Complete Travel Marketing Handbook.
 (1990). “Self-Cybernetics: Toward an Integrated Model of Lincolnwood, IL: NTC Business Books.
Self-Concept Processes.” Systems Research, 7 (1): 19-32. Vogt, J. W. (1978). “Wandering: Youth and Travel Behavior.” In Tourism
Sirgy, M. Joseph, and J. Danes (1982). “Self-Image/Product-Image Congru- and Behavior, edited by M. D. Zamora. Williamsburg, VA: College of
ence Models: Testing Selected Models.” In Advances in Consumer Re- William and Mary Press, pp. 19-40.
search, Vol. 9, edited by Andrew Mitchell. Ann Arbor, MI: Witt, S. F., and C. A. Martin (1987). “Econometric Models for Forecasting
Association for Consumer Research, pp. 556-61. International Tourism Demand.” Journal of Travel Research, 25:
Sirgy, M. Joseph, D. Grewal, T. F. Mangleburg, J. O. Park, K. Chon, C. B. 23-30.
Claiborne, J. S. Johar, and H. Berkman (1997). “Assessing the Predic- Wood, W., and C. A. Kallgren (1988). “Communicator Attributes and Per-
tive Validity of Two Methods of Measuring Self-Congruity.” Journal suasion: Recipients’ Access to Attitude-Relevant Information in
of the Academy of Marketing Science, 25: 229-41. Memory.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 14: 172-82.

Downloaded from [Link] at University of Alabama at Birmingham on May 31, 2014