Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Within festivals and events, film festivals are among the fastest growing cultural events in the world and are recognised as bringing environmental, sociocultural and economic benefits to host tourism destinations including enhanced well-being. These festivals are an important marketing strategy for developing destination image and attracting interest towards a destination. However, there are limited studies on the film festival experience exploring the antecedents of participants’ satisfaction. This study examines the relationship between eudaimonic feelings, novelty, local culture, nostalgia, perceived quality, satisfaction, and behavioural intentions. Data were gathered during the last 3 days of the Penedo Film in the City of Penedo, Northeast Brazil using a questionnaire. A total of 97 valid questionnaires were collected from the festival attendees. Findings show that only eudaimonic feelings and perceived quality are predictors of satisfaction. To the best of authors knowledge, this study is the first to examine the perceived experience of participants in a film festival context from a positive psychology perspective and providing further empirical support for construct validity of eudaimonic feelings. The findings contribute to the existing tourism literature on film festivals by identifying key antecedents (eudaimonic feelings and perceived quality) and outcomes (behavioural intentions) of satisfaction with film festival. One of the main managerial implications includes engaging film festival participants in co-creation processes and in promoting group discussions about a specific movie with an appealing and social relevant theme.

Keywords

Event experience film festival eudaimonia eudaimonic feelings satisfaction

Introduction

Events are pervasive in today’s societies and have become strongly associated with the places where they are held. They help in shaping and promoting the place, in addition to playing a central role in the way places are perceived and consumed (Zhang et al., 2021; Wise and Harris, 2019). For example, film festivals are unique events that provide an alternative to mainstream movies that dominate the global market (Bachman and Hull, 2023) and are acknowledged as offering a transformative environment and distinctive atmosphere for celebration (Báez-Montenegro and Devesa-Fernández, 2020). Today, film festivals have increased in numbers (Wang and Kao, 2023) and complexity (Park et al., 2011), and simultaneously are capturing the attention of academics in social sciences (Bachman and Hull, 2023).

Film festivals are associated with positive economic and social impacts on the places where they are held (Bachman et al., 2022; Kendall et al., 2021). People attend film festivals for several reasons including novelty seeking, entertainment, escapism, and experience sharing (Yolal et al., 2019; Báez-Montenegro and Devesa-Fernández, 2017). Although some of these motivations are shown to have a positive correlation with participants’ satisfaction (SAT from here on) towards an event (Báez-Montenegro and Devesa-Fernández, 2017; Cosma et al., 2016), existing literature lacks in describing how participants experience film festivals and how their perceived experience influences SAT towards the event. Participant’s perception of economic, cultural, and environmental impacts of film festival are linked to their SAT (Jani and Mwakyusa, 2021). In addition, participant’s perceptions of cultural/educational and community benefits are found to directly associate with subjective well-being (Bachman et al., 2022). Moreover, the formation of SAT judgements depends on the consumer's experience (Oliver, 2010; Baker and Crompton, 2000), indicating that participant’s perceived experience is a strong a predictor of SAT.

Prior research has established the experiential dimensions of consumption as one of the main research streams in the field of tourism and hospitality (Kim and So, 2022). However, there are limited studies examining experiential dimensions of complex events, such as film festivals. Park et al. (2010) used the experience economy framework and dimensions as predictors of the escapist experience and SAT towards an international film festival in Korea and analysed the effect of escapist experience and traveler SAT as mediators of the other experiential dimensions on behavioral intention. Their findings indicate that film festivals have a positive impact on visitor SAT and in experiencing escape from a daily routine. In another study, Rajaobelina et al. (2019) examined the mediating role of place attachment between affective and cognitive experience and word-of-mouth in Canadian music and film festivals. Their findings revealed a positive impact of attendees’ affective and cognitive experience on place attachment, and the positive link between affective experience and word-of-mouth. Place identity was found to play a full mediating role with respect to cognitive experience and word-of-mouth. These studies point to the complexity of experiencing film festivals. Thus, other experiential dimensions related to the film festival experience should be explored by drawing on new concepts and frameworks in the existing literature, namely the experiential dimensions of memorable tourism experience scale, such as hedonism, novelty, local culture, refreshment, meaningfulness, involvement, and knowledge (Kim et al., 2012), which have been widely used to predict SAT in different contexts, including festivals (Hosany et al., 2022).

Positive psychology (PP from here on) theories and frameworks are an alternative source for understanding perceptions of the event experience and derived psychological rewards and benefits (Filep et al., 2015). PP has received attention from tourism and event researchers (e.g., Vada et al., 2020; Filep and Laing, 2019) in a variety of contexts, such as music festivals (Saragih and Amelia, 2020; Neuhofer et al., 2020; Rodríguez-Campo et al., 2019), sports events (Armbrecht and Andersson, 2019), and LGBTQIA+ parades (Zhou et al., 2021). Few studies have been conducted in the context of film festivals. In addition, PP builds on the concept of eudaimonia (Medeiros et al., 2020). Eudaimonia has been explored in a tourism context (Lee and Jeong, 2021; Medeiros et al., 2020; Lengieza et al., 2019) to differentiate some tourism experiences from others which are purely hedonic. Eudaimonic experiences are described as those related to self-connectedness and authenticity, positive social interactions, sense of self-actualisation, meaningfulness, and life purpose. Accordingly, recent studies propose new approaches to the tourism experience through conceptualization and measurement of eudaimonia (Medeiros et al., 2023; Demeter et al., 2022). Demeter et al. (2022) define eudaimonia at both state and trait levels, as measured by a single-item each one, and Medeiros et al. (2023) propose a multi-item approach for measuring eudaimonia at state-level, introducing the construct eudaimonic feelings (EF). Their study verified high internal consistency among the construct’s 19 items single-factor structure.

Studies examining the relationship between eudaimonia and SAT are limited and controversial as in some cases eudaimonia is considered an outcome of SAT (Chen and Li, 2018) and in others a predictor (Lee and Jeong, 2021), with plausible arguments for both hypotheses. This study draws on theoretical and empirical studies positing that eudaimonic experiences only exist accompanied by hedonic enjoyment (Saragih and Amelia, 2020; Lee and Jeong, 2019), and the situation in that activities that are supposedly high on eudaimonia but low on hedonic enjoyment is a theoretical null (Waterman et al., 2008; Waterman, 2005). As eudaimonia relates to self-identity and it is experienced as pleasurable (Waterman, 1990, 1993), it therefore participates in the formation of SAT judgements. In tourism contexts, eudaimonia proxies, such as self-expressiveness (Bosnjak et al., 2016) or self-identification (Karagöz and Uysal, 2023; Alrawadieh et al., 2019), were found to have positive effect on subjective well-being and SAT.

This study’s aim is three-fold: (1) to examine the perceived experience of participants to a film festival from a PP perspective; (2) to analyse the relations among experiential dimensions, SAT, and behavioural intentions, and (3) to examine further empirical support to construct validity for EF (Medeiros et al., 2023). Five experiential constructs are examined as SAT antecedents: novelty, local culture, nostalgia, perceived quality, and eudaimonic feelings (EF). In addition, perceived quality and SAT are analysed as predictors of behavioural intentions.

To provide further evidence of construct validity for EF, its predictive power is examined. A step further in construct validation concerns the construct relation to an external criteria variable (AERA, 2014). A relatively well-established methodology for construct validation in behavioural sciences relates to empirically analysing the construct position in a hypothesised nomological net (Preckel and Brunner, 2017). Structural equation modelling (SEM) techniques are useful for this purpose (Preckel and Brunner, 2017). Partial least squares path modelling (PLS) is popular in the tourism and hospitality fields (Ali et al., 2018; Do Valle and Assaker, 2015), mainly because of its flexibility in dealing with variables lacking normality, its prediction orientation (Latan, 2018; Shmueli et al., 2016), and recommended application for theory development through exploratory research (Sarstedt et al., 2021; Hair et al., 2019; Latan, 2018). Thus, the PLS approach was chosen for this study. Data were gathered during the last 3 days of the Penedo Film Circuit 2021 in the City of Penedo, Northeast Brazil using a questionnaire. A total of 97 valid questionnaires were collected. Results show the predictive power of EF, providing further evidence for the validity of the construct.

The study contributes to the existing literature on PP in tourism and event studies. Firstly, this study examines the perceived experience of participants to a film festival from a PP perspective. Secondly, it presents complementary empirical support to construct validity for EF, recently introduced in the tourism literature (Medeiros et al., 2023). Thirdly, the study points to theoretical advancements that supports the relation between eudaimonia as an experience and SAT. Lastly, as managerial implication, in providing empirical evidence that eudaimonia influences SAT, the study highlights the potential of film festivals in offering personal meaningful experiences, which can offer valuable insights for event design and management.

In the theoretical background section, the fundamentals for the EF construct are presented. Then, the rationale for the hypotheses of SAT antecedents and outcome is developed. The method section presents the procedures for data collection and analysis. The following section presents the results, while the last section discusses the results and suggests managerial implications and orientations for future research.

Theoretical background

Eudaimonic feelings

In its classic conception, eudaimonia is defined as “living truly who one is” (Norton, 1976: p. 216). The search for understanding, expressing, and realising the true self is the foundation for achieving eudaimonia (Schlegel et al., 2016). Although, in its classical sense, it does not refer to a subjective state, contemporary psychology recognises the existence of subjective experiences that accompany the pursuit of that which is worthy in one’s life (Huta and Waterman, 2014). Many psychological theories of motivation, development and human functioning assume eudaimonia as a subjective experience (Huta and Ryan, 2010; Ryff and Singer, 2008). Thus, it “includes states and/or pursuits associated with using and developing the best in oneself, in accordance with one’s true self and one’s deeper principles” (Huta, 2013: p. 201).

EF are defined as “the cognitive-affective appraisals (subjective feelings) towards self-fulfilment, authenticity, truthful social interactions, and personal meaningfulness concerning a tourism experience” (Medeiros et al., 2023: p. 2), and conceptualised at state (situational) level, i.e., considering the phenomenological category to which eudaimonia falls (Huta, 2022). The construct items capture four feelings as perceived by individuals: (i) feelings of recovery and relief; (ii) feelings of truthful social interaction; (iii) feelings of self-fulfilment and authenticity; and (iv) feelings of life purpose and meaning. Moreover, conceptualisation of EF assumes that individuals’ appraisals towards these different feelings are merged, perceived as “a broad sense of self” (Medeiros et al., 2023: p. 2). Accordingly, the construct simultaneously captures the four feelings as perceived by the individuals when they appraise the experience (Medeiros et al., 2023). Depending on which feeling is more salient, the “eudaimonic feelings spot” sheds light towards that specific feeling (see Figure 1). This spot can be larger or narrower depending on how strong or weak the four core feelings are.

Figure 1.

Eudaimonic feelings.

Feelings of recovery and relief relate to the restorative capabilities of tourism as a leisure activity, and incorporate the facet of disconnection or detachment, which allows distancing from everyday life and momentary disconnection from social roles, providing freedom to act more spontaneously (Brown, 2013; Kim and Jamal, 2007). This aspect is associated with the psychological mechanism of detachment-relaxation that enables homeostasis (Newman et al., 2013; Vittersø, 2011). In addition, feelings of recovery also capture hedonic elements, such as tension relief and relaxation, which are experienced as pleasant (Newman et al., 2014; Vittersø, 2011).

Feelings of truthful social interaction capture the social aspects of leisure activities, recognised as opportunities for socialisation, including participation in events (Morgan, 2006). Theoretical approaches on eudaimonia consider the dimension of relationships as essential for the individual’s well-being and well-functioning (Carvalho and Sheppard, 2022; Lee et al., 2022; Selem et al., 2022). Tourism experiences provide opportunities for spontaneous social interactions and a sense of community (Kirillova et al., 2017; Matteucci and Filep, 2017; Campos et al., 2016).

Feelings of self-fulfilment and authenticity connect to the notion of true self, which is the core element of eudaimonia in both conceptions, classical and modern (Smallenbroek et al., 2017; Huta, 2016b; Schlegel et al., 2016). Authenticity “involves having one’s own personal experiences, whether thoughts, emotions, needs, desires, preferences or beliefs, processes captured by the injunction to ‘know oneself'” (Harter, 2002: p. 382).

According to the existential authenticity approach in tourism (Kirillova et al., 2016; Kirillova and Lehto, 2015; Brown, 2013; Kim and Jamal, 2007), feelings of self-discovery and self-fulfilment are experienced through the disconnection from daily routine and the entry into a liminal space-time that enables self-reflection, contact with the self, and self-expression. Such feelings, combined with the recognition and development of individual potential, enable meaningful life choices, which, in turn, guide a healthy formation of self-identity (Waterman et al., 2008; Waterman, 1990, 1993).

Finally, seeking for meaning is a fundamental tool for humans to impose stability on life (Baumeister and Vohs, 2002). Most psychological approaches to eudaimonia include meaning as essential to well-being, with high consensus found in conceptualizations of eudaimonia, assumedly because it incorporates the notion of life purpose, common in the idea of a virtuous life or the search for what makes a life well lived. Purpose in life is the individual’s ability to find meaning and direction in personal experiences and to set goals for own’s life (Ryff and Singer, 2008). Therefore, meaning is one the most important element of eudaimonia (Huta, 2016a).

Activities such as travel, learning about different cultures, meeting new people and visiting places create experiential values, excitement, and provide meaning to people lives (Sirgy and Uysal, 2016: p. 490). Tourism experiences can be perceived as personally meaningful (Liu and Kirillova, 2021; Kirillova et al., 2016, 2017; Wilson and Harris, 2006). The conceptualization of EF construct also assumes that feelings of meaningfulness and life purpose are directly connected to the other three feelings: recovery and relief, truthful social interaction, and self-fulfilment and authenticity, when they are jointly experienced (Medeiros et al., 2023).

Hypothesis development

Satisfaction

SAT is defined as “the consumer’s fulfilment response” (Oliver, 2010: p. 8). Judgment of SAT occurs through the perception that the consumption experience meets the expectation in a pleasant way (Oliver, 1999). In the context of tourism, SAT is considered as the comparison of the travel experience with pre-trip expectations (Chen and Chen, 2010). However, this purely cognitive approach evolved to the understanding that it also involves affective states (Sthapit et al., 2019; Medeiros et al., 2015). Accordingly, SAT is best defined as a “cognitive-affective state derived from a consumption experience” (Del Bosque and San Martín, 2008: p. 553).

Eudaimonia occurs only with pleasurable subjective states, i.e., hedonic feelings are a necessary condition for eudaimonia (Lee and Jeong, 2019). It is hypothesised that individuals experience a “broad sense of self” (Medeiros et al., 2023: p. (2) as a pleasurable subjective state. Since SAT synthesises individual cognitive-affective evaluations towards the experience, it is thus expected that “feeling eudaemon” directly affects SAT judgements. Therefore, EF are directly related to SAT. The following hypothesis is stated:

EF is positively related to SAT

Novelty

Novelty (NOV) is described as the subjective feeling that emerges when the individual is facing something new and different from daily life, thus living an opposite experience to what is already known (Mather, 2013). Novel stimuli are essential to the tourism experience (Campos et al., 2020; Mitas and Bastiaansen, 2018; Lee and Crompton, 1992) and NOV seeking helps in interpreting tourist psychology and behaviour (Skavronskaya et al., 2020). NOV is one of the main motivations for tourism (Farber and Hall, 2007; Dunman and Mattila 2005) including film festival attendance (Yolal et al., 2019; Báez-Montenegro and Devesa-Fernández, 2014). NOV relates to the event experience (Geus et al., 2016), experience memorability (Skavronskaya et al., 2020; Kim et al., 2012), and destination SAT and loyalty (Toyama and Yamada, 2012, 2016). Based on these studies, the following hypothesis is proposed:

NOV is positively related to SAT

Local culture

Learning about local cultures (LC) and interacting with them is one of the main motivations for traveling (Coudounaris and Sthapit, 2017; Zhang et al., 2021). Interaction with LC has been found to be one of the main factors that make travel experiences memorable (Coelho and Gosling, 2018; Chandralal and Valenzuela, 2015). However, there is lack of consensus in the existing literature about the role of LC in tourism experience. Concerning the effects of LC on SAT, the literature is argumentative. Direct effects of LC on SAT were found among heritage tourists (Rasoolimanesh et al., 2022), but not among nature-based tourists (Gohary et al., 2018). In the context of a cultural festival in China, interaction with LC was the main motivator for participants (Zhang et al., 2021). These findings suggest that the importance of LC on tourism experience seems to be context dependent, including the type of the event (Crompton and McKay, 1997). It is assumed that LC may influence the festival experience and is an antecedent of SAT. Accordingly, the following hypothesis is proposed:

Local culture is positively related to SAT

Nostalgia

Nostalgia (NOST) was first used in medical studies to describe a pathological condition involving external manifestations of individuals caused by homesickness, being later expanded to describe a positive emotional experiential and spatial context (Christou, 2020). NOST is considered a multidimensional construct in which positive and negative emotions connect the past, the present and the future, depending on the individual’s personality traits and subjective perception of time as well as varying between different cultural boundaries (Han and Bae, 2022; Jain et al., 2019).When described as vicarious, NOST can be understood as a personal feeling based on experiences, autobiographical and vicarious memories, including fantasy and historical elements, but also a singular desire for an imagined past. It permeates past-oriented cognition driven by the search for authenticity (Chi and Chi, 2020).

In the context of heritage tourism, memory is related to recollections and the combination of contradictory feelings of pleasure and sadness, both provoked by various ideas about a collective past, usually idealised through places, enactments of history, cultural heritage, landscapes (Chi and Chi, 2020; Christou, 2020; Leong et al., 2015) or even sensory stimuli, like sounds or smells (Han and Bae, 2022). Moreover, external elements, and surroundings, both tangible or intangibles, such as facilities, local atmosphere that encourages participation, involvement, and socialisation can trigger NOST (Han and Bae, 2022; Christou, 2020).

Historical NOST is found to predict SAT (Verma and Rajendran, 2021) and to influence behavioural intentions (BI) by provoking positive emotions (Chi and Chi, 2020). It is expected thus that historical settings can evoke NOST, which, in turn, can influence SAT. The setting of this study is a national historical heritage officially recognized in Brazil. The focal event takes place in the heart of the city historic centre; therefore, it is assumed that historical settings may influence the festival participants’ experience. Thus, the following hypothesis is stated:

Nostalgia is positively related to SAT

Perceived quality

Perceived quality (PQ) is defined as the consumer’s assessment of the product or service performance (Baker and Crompton, 2000). There are numerous studies indicating PQ as a predictor of SAT (Chi et al., 2020; Muskat et al., 2019; Hallak al., 2018), including BI (Cole and Illum, 2006; Cronin et al., 2000; Baker and Crompton, 2000). Concerning film festivals, some PQ dimensions were found to be predictors of SAT, such as responsiveness, supportive amenities, quality of facilities, scheduling, accessibility (Park et al., 2011), and performance (Tkaczynski, 2013). In addition, SAT has a strong direct impact on BI in many sectors, including tourism and hospitality (Xu et al., 2021; Assaker et al., 2020; Chen and Jiang, 2019). Direct effects of PQ on BI have also been reported in the literature (Abdou et al., 2022; Meeprom and Silanoi, 2020). Thus, PQ is an antecedent of SAT and can explain BI. Accordingly, the following hypotheses are analyzed in this study’s context:

H5a

Perceived quality is positively related to SAT

H5b

Perceived quality is positively related to BI

Behavioural intentions

Behavioural intention refers to behaviour subsequent to an experience (Abdou et al., 2022). Analysis of future behaviour is considered critical to an understanding of how tourism destinations and tourists’ satisfaction may evolve (Afshardoost and Eshaghi, 2020), as intentions assumedly lead to future consumption responses (Jeong et al., 2019). According to Oliver (2010, 1999), loyalty is a deep commitment to a consistently preferred product or service in the future, despite situational influences and marketing efforts that can cause behaviour change. When applied to tourist destinations and events, loyalty has been linked to future BI, described by Oliver (1999) as conative loyalty. Despite criticism on method bias in measuring SAT and BI, in addition to assessing the relationship between them (Dolnicar et al., 2013), robust evidence in the literature consistently indicates the strong relationship between those constructs (Tanford and Jung, 2017). Thus, it is here assumed that SAT is an antecedent of BI. The relationship between SAT as an antecedent of BI in event contexts has been widely explored in the literature (Fytopoulou et al., 2021; Meeprom and Silanoi, 2020; Borges et al., 2020). Based on this evidence, the following hypothesis is proposed:

SAT is positively related to BI

Figure 2 summarises the conceptual framework of this study.

Figure 2.

Conceptual model.

Method

Setting

This study was conducted during the Penedo Film Circuit 2021 (PFC), held from November 22-28 in the City of Penedo, Northeast Brazil. The PFC has been taking place since 2011, organized and managed by the Federal University of Alagoas, in cooperation with the Penedo City Hall and with the support of national institutions for development. The event’s program is diversified. In addition to film screenings, the festival includes lectures, round tables, and workshops aimed at stimulating the audio-visual market, as well as the local production chain, both for the public and national cinema enthusiasts. The program integrates artistic and cultural presentations and musical shows, with an emphasis on local artists and other non-competitive works, such as children movies and national feature films. Activities are entirely free of charge, with free access to the public, and venues provide accessibility conditions for the elderly and people with mobility and hearing impairments.

Research design and sample

The research design included application of a cross-sectional survey using a non-probabilistic sample (Bryman, 2012). Convenience sampling was used due to its cost-effectiveness, efficiency and simplicity to implement (Sthapit et al., 2019). Convenience sampling is widely applied in many fields, such as organizational studies and other related social sciences (Bryman, 2012). Authors acknowledge that this technique has the limitation of sample representativeness and thus of findings generalizability. Data were collected during the last 3 days of the event (November 26-28, 2021). Trained interviewers selected from a group of college students approached participants and informed them about the research objectives and asked about their willingness to participate in the study. A total of 97 valid questionnaires were collected with no missing answers.

The sample size is in accordance with recommendations by Hair et al. (2017, p. 26). For the significance level (α) of 0.05, the statistical power (1-□) of 0.80, and the minimum expected R² of 0.25, for five predictors (the number of arrows pointing to SAT; see Figure 3), the recommended sample size is 45. Considering the observed smallest significant absolute path coefficient in the model (in this case, b = 0.432; see also Figure 4), a posteriori calculation of the minimum sample size requirement using the inverse square root and exponential gamma (Kock, 2018; Kock and Hadaya, 2018) revealed that the 97 observations was sufficient to detect significant relationships between constructs with medium to large effect sizes (f² ≥ 0.15).

Figure 3.

Structural model. Note: results obtained through the bootstrap procedure of 5000 resampling, with corrected bias (BCa). Values on the inner model arrows: “path coefficient (p-value)”. EF = Eudaimonic feelings; LC = Local culture; NOV = Novelty; NOST = Nostalgia; PQ = Perceived quality; SAT = Satisfaction; BI = Behavioural intentions.

Figure 4.

PLS-SEM model evaluation (adapted from Sarstedt et al. 2021; Hair et al., 2017).

Many respondents (73.2%) had previously participated in the event and were residents (76.29%). The distribution of the sample in terms of gender showed a small majority of women (52.58%) compared to men (43.3%). Three respondents (about 3%) declared themselves non-binary, and only one respondent chose not to declare the gender. On average, the participants in the sample were 30.3 years old, with the lowest value being 18 years old and the highest 75 years old (standard deviation = 12.66 years old). Table 1 shows the sample characteristics.

Table 1.

Sample characteristics.

		f	%
Gender	Male	42	43.30
	Female	51	52.58
	Nor male nor female	3	3.09
	Rather not to declare	1	1.03
Marital status	Single	64	65.98
	Married	19	19.59
	Separated or divorced	3	3.09
	Stable union	10	10.31
	Widowed	1	1.03
Formal education	Elementary	9	9.28
	High school	56	57.73
	Superior (undergrad)	25	25.77
	Specialization/MBA	1	1.03
	Master degree	1	1.03
	PhD	5	5.15
Age	Min	18
	Max	75
	Mean	30.30
	Median	25
	Standard deviation	12.66
	Skewness	1.50
	Kurtosis	1.37
First time participation	Yes	26	26.80
First time participation	No	71	73.20
Resident	Yes	74	76.29
Resident	No	23	23.71

Note: Absolute and relative frequency are shown for all variables, except for Age. n = 97.

Measurement

Constructs were modelled as reflective and measured using adapted items found in existing studies. A five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree) was used to measure all items, except items related to Perceived Quality, whose 5-point response anchors were: 1 = Very bad; 2 = Bad; 3 = Average; 4 = Good; 5 = Excellent (Mondo et al., 2020). Constructs definitions are shown in Appendix 1.

Data analysis methods

Univariate non-normality was verified by Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Shapiro-Wilk tests. Therefore, multivariate normality was not assumed (Pituch and Stevens, 2016; Gnanedesikan, 1997). Mahalanobis D² distance measure did not find multivariate outliers (Hair et al., 2014). The model was tested using structural equation modelling with partial least squares path model (PLS-SEM; hereafter PLS) because data characteristics (non-normality), and the PLS prediction orientation (Latan, 2018; Shmueli et al., 2016). Evaluation of the PLS results followed the guidelines suggested by Sarstedt et al. (2021) and others (Hair et al., 2017, 2019, 2020) as shown in Figure 4.

Results

Measurement model

Item loadings ranged between 0.642 [PQ7] to 0.950 (SAT2) (Sarstedt et al., 2021). Cronbach’s α and composite reliability (Raykov, 1997) found items’ reliability for each construct. In addition, average variance extracted found constructs’ convergent validity. Discriminant validity was found as examined by the heterotrait-monotrait ratio (Sarstedt et al., 2021; Henseler et al., 2015) (Table 2).

Table 2.

Measurement model assessment.

	α^a	CR^b	AVE^c	Heterotrait-monotrait ratio (HTMT)^d,e
	α^a	CR^b	AVE^c	[A]	[B]	[C]	[D]	[E]	[F]	[G]
[A] Local culture	0.872	0.906	0.657
[B] Eudaimonic feelings	0.956	0.960	0.558	0.826
[C] Behavioural intentions	0.855	0.901	0.696	0.631	0.702
[D] Nostalgia	0.771	0.851	0.590	0.685	0.626	0.355
[E] Novelty	0.736	0.847	0.650	0.626	0.797	0.394	0.548
[F] Perceived quality	0.868	0.896	0.519	0.566	0.553	0.609	0.372	0.328
[G] Satisfaction	0.929	0.955	0.875	0.559	0.668	0.808	0.373	0.468	0.702

Note: Values of reference: α ≥ 0.70; CR ≥ 0.70; AVE ≥0.50 (Sarstedt et al., 2021).

^aCronbach α.

^bComposite reliability.

^cAverage Variance Extracted.

^dHTMT values ≤0.85 indicate discriminant validity between constructs (Henseler et al., 2015).

^eConfidence intervals of 95%, obtained from bootstrap procedure for 5000 resampling, with corrected bias (BCa) did not include value one for any of the constructs.

Structural model

Assessment for multicollinearity showed lack of issue since the tolerance values observed were below 0.20, corresponding to VIF (variance inflation factor) values below 5 (Hair et al., 2017). Figure 4 shows the structural model, including all construct indicators and respective loads, the path coefficients, the corresponding p-value (parenthetical), and the coefficients of determination (R²) of the endogenous constructs. In turn, Table 3 shows t-statistics and the significance of the path coefficients, and respective effect sizes.

Table 3.

Values, significance (t statistic and p-value), 95% confidence intervals of path coefficients and effect sizes.

Hypothesis/Path	Path coefficient (b)	t statistic	p-value	95% confidence interval		Effect size (f²)^a	Conclusion
Hypothesis/Path	Path coefficient (b)	t statistic	p-value	2.5%	97.5%	Effect size (f²)^a	Conclusion
H1: EF → SAT	0.489	3.578	0.000	0.234	0.774	0.153	Accepted
H2: NOV → SAT	−0.004	0.032	0.975	−0.210	0.237	0.000	Rejected
H3: LC → SAT	−0.027	0.177	0.860	−0.373	0.232	0.001	Rejected
H4: NOST → SAT	−0.066	0.984	0.325	−0.197	0.065	0.006	Rejected
H5a: PQ → SAT	0.432	4.374	0.000	0.232	0.607	0.296	Accepted
H5b: PQ → BI	0.161	1.502	0.133	−0.050	0.364	0.036	Rejected
H6: SAT → BI	0.636	6.199	0.000	0.425	0.824	0.538	Accepted

Note: results obtained through the bootstrap procedure of 5000 resampling, with corrected bias (BCa).

^aValues of reference: f² < 0.02 => null effect; 0.02 ≤ f² < 0.15 => small effect; 0.15 ≤ f² < 0.35 => medium effect; f² ≥ 0.35 = large effect (Sarstedt et al., 2021; Cohen, 1988).

EF = Eudaimonic feelings; LC = Local culture; NOV = Novelty; NOST = Nostalgia; PQ = Perceived quality; SAT = Satisfaction; BI = Behavioural intentions.

Of the five constructs hypothesised as antecedents of SAT, only EF and PQ were significant predictors. Taken together, the antecedent constructs accounted for 56.2% (R² = 0.562) of the SAT variance. The path coefficient EF → SAT (b = 0.489) implies that, when increasing one standard deviation unit of EF, SAT will increase by 0.489 standard deviation unit, keeping all other independent constructs constant. That relationship revealed a medium effect size (f² = 0.153). Likewise, also with medium effect size (f² = 0.296), the path coefficient PQ → SAT (b = 0.432) indicates that an increase of one standard deviation of PQ will increase by standard deviation 0.432 unit in SAT. In contrast, NOV, LC, and NOST were not found predictors of SAT in the PFC context. Their respective path coefficients were neither relevant nor significant and had null effect sizes.

In turn, SAT and PQ accounted for 56.6% (R² = 0.566) of variance of the BI. However, only the path coefficient SAT → BI (b = 0.636) was significant and relevant, with large effect size (f² = 0.538). It should be noted, however, that even though the path coefficient PQ → BI (b = 0.161) was not significant, it had a small effect size (f² = 0.036), suggesting a possible relationship, albeit not highly relevant. Thus, the result pointed to a relationship between PQ → BI predominantly mediated by SAT.

Model’s predictive power assessment

Stone-Geisser’s Q² values obtained through the blindfolding procedure of cross-validation of construct redundancy (Hair et al., 2017), found predictive relevance of the model. In addition, PLS predict (Shmueli et al., 2016, 2019) found high model’s out-of-sample predictive power. Tables 4 and 5 show these results.

Table 4.

Cross-validation of construct redundancy^a.

	SSO^b	SSE^c	Q² (=1-SSE/SSO)
Local culture	485.000	485.000
Eudaimonic feelings	1843.000	1843.000
Behavioural intentions	388.000	246.340	0.365
Nostalgia	388.000	388.000
Novelty	291.000	291.000
Perceived quality	776.000	776.000
Satisfaction	291.000	152.217	0.477

Note: Results obtained by blindfolding procedure, with an omission distance of 7.

^aValues of reference: 0 < Q² < 0.25 => small predictive relevance; 0.25 ≤ Q² < 0.50 => medium predictive relevance; Q² ≥ 0.50 => high predictive relevance (Hair et al., 2019).

^bSum of Squared Observations.

^cSum of Squared Errors.

Table 5.

Model’s out-of-sample predictive power^a.

	RMSE^b		MAE^c		Q² prediction
	PLS	LM^d	PLS	LM	PLS	LM
BI1	0.477	0.577	0.360	0.432	0.385	0.099
BI2	1.013	1.430	0.749	1.093	0.087	−0.818
BI3	0.548	0.764	0.419	0.558	0.350	−0.262
BI4	0.603	0.876	0.461	0.667	0.338	−0.398
SAT1	0.549	0.753	0.411	0.554	0.353	−0.219
SAT2	0.485	0.602	0.371	0.441	0.471	0.184
SAT3	0.538	0.690	0.387	0.515	0.375	−0.027

Note: Results obtained from PLS predict procedure, with 10 repetitions and 10 sub-samples.

^aValues of reference: (1) Q² prediction value for each indicator ≤0 => the model has no predictive power; (2) PLS-SEM < LM (for RMSE or MAE): (a) for none of the indicators => absence of predictive power, (b) for some indicators => low predictive power, (c) for most indicators => medium predictive power, (d) for all indicators => high predictive power (Sarstedt et al., 2021; Shmueli et al., 2019).

^bRoot Mean Squared Error.

^cMean Absolute Error.

^dLinear Model.

The importance-performance map analysis (IPMA) extends the standard results reporting of path coefficient estimates by adding a dimension that considers the average values of the latent variable scores (Ringle and Sarstedt, 2016). IPMA contrasts the total effects, representing the predecessor constructs’ importance in shaping a certain target construct, with their average latent variable scores indicating their performance (Ringle and Sarstedt, 2016). The rational is to identify predecessor constructs that have a relatively high importance for predicting the target construct (those with strong total effect), but also have a relatively low performance (low average latent variable scores) so that improvements can be implemented (Hair et al., 2018). Figure 5 shows the importance-performance map having SAT as the target construct.

Figure 5.

Importance-performance map. Note: Ceteris paribus, the increase of “1 point” in each predictor construct impacts on Satisfaction in the same magnitude of the respective value of the total effect (non-standardized) (Hair et al., 2018). Non-standardized total effect: LC = −0.026; NOV = −0.003; NOST = −0.046; EF = 0.435; PQ = 0.531

Although all constructs presented relatively high performance, only EF and PQ showed high importance in predicting SAT. Constructs’ average scores ranged as follows: NOST ( $\bar{x}$ = 3.66), NOV ( $\bar{x}$ = 3.87), EF ( $\bar{x}$ = 4.13), PQ ( $\bar{x}$ = 4.23), LC ( $\bar{x}$ = 4.42). LC showed the highest performance, but it is placed in the upper left quadrant of the map, as NOST and NOV, indicating that those constructs were not relevant to explain SAT. On the other hand, EF and PQ are found in the upper right corner of the map, with PQ in the extreme point, which means that these two constructs performed very well, in addition to present high relevance in predicting SAT.

Discussion and conclusions

This study conducted on the PFC experience highlights distinctive characteristics of participants that help to understand the results obtained. Firstly, most of the participants are residents and attendees at the event in previous editions. This may explain why NOV, NOST, and LC were not found to be significant predictors of SAT. The PFC has been taking place for 11 years, being the second biggest event in the city of Penedo. In this sense, the event seems to be integrated into the daily lives of residents and is not perceived as novel for most participants in the study.

Regarding NOST, Penedo is a historic city that preserves many buildings from colonial and imperial Brazil. The event takes place in the heart of the historic centre. However, taking results into account, the feeling of NOST is not associated with evaluations on SAT towards the event. As most participants in the study were residents, i.e., people who were born, grew up and live daily in or nearby Penedo’s settings and landscapes, it is suggested that the feeling of “living in a past time” does not match their current reality. This same interpretation applies to NOV. Previous research supports the claim that both novel experiences and the desire to live novel experiences are strong motivators of participation in touristic activities (Campos et al., 2020). More concretely though, Vittersø, Prebensen, Hetland, and Dahl’s (2017) study considered eudaimonia as interest, immersion, and engagement involved in the pursuit of important goals during experiences. Findings from this research showed that eudaimonic experiences usually present higher degrees of novelty, which in turn may lead to higher propensity to behave accordingly, as in recommending the experience to others. A subsequent study from Blomstervik et al. (2020) found the varying importance of novelty in the relationship between physical staging and human interaction on behavioural intention. These results suggest that sample characteristics are important to consider when it comes to analysis of NOV.

Results suggest that LC does not impact SAT with the festival experience, which may be because, for most participants, they are part of the local way of life, preventing them from being particularly attentive to distinct aspects of LC which may be memorable only to non-local participants.

As expected, PQ is a predictor of SAT, corroborating existing studies (Chi et al., 2020; Hallak et al., 2018). In addition, results indicate that PQ does not directly lead to BI. This finding supports the existing literature that establishes SAT as a mediator between PQ and BI (Muskat et al., 2019; Žabkar et al., 2010), including in events context (Pivac et al., 2019). Therefore, PQ accounted for the judgement’s formation on SAT, which, in turn, did lead to BI.

The study’s main contribution concerns theoretical and practical implications from empirical evidence obtained for EF as a predictor of SAT. Primarily, the study presents complementary empirical support to construct validity for EF based on its predictive power. This helps to lessen conceptual noise and fragmentation in the field, in addition to offering accurateness for the measurement of eudaimonia in future research. In addition, in conceptualizing eudaimonia at state-level, the EF construct provides an understanding of how people cognitively represent their appraisals based on their own true selves in a given situation. As presented in Figure 1, EF conceptualization suggests that truthful social interactions, recovery and relief, self-fulfilment and authenticity, life purpose and meaning are evaluated by people as merged feelings that are perceived as a broad sense of self.

Moreover, this research showed that eudaimonia participates in the formation of judgments concerning SAT, thus making a theoretical contribution in this respect. The connection between self-identity and positive feelings, well-being and functioning is known in psychology since William James (1890), who posited that the sense of self-identity derives from the perception of continuity and unity in the mind, experienced as a feeling of intimacy and a feeling of warmth, providing an overall positive physiological feeling. This connection is consistently established in studies on identity in developmental psychology (Meca et al. 2015; Pilarska, 2014; Schwartz et al., 2013; Ritchie et al., 2013). The self-expressiveness theory of identity (Waterman, 1990) equates personal expressiveness with eudaimonia, defined as the feelings of optimal experience that accompany the search for fulfilling one's potential and capabilities, in engaging in self-expressive activities (Waterman, 1995; 1993). Individuals involved in such activities are shown to have high psychosocial functioning (Waterman et al., 2013). Self-expressiveness is found to be a stronger predictor of healthy outcomes than hedonic enjoyment in physical exercise (Lee et al., 2014). In addition, in sport tourism context, self-expressiveness is found to moderate the effect of hedonic enjoyment on personal happiness (Bosnjak et al., 2016), i.e., when self-expressiveness is high, the influence of hedonic enjoyment on personal happiness is significantly lessened. Thus, research supports the positive link between a sense of self (i.e., eudaimonia) and positive feelings, well-being, and functioning. As a result, it is claimed that individuals cognitively experience a broad sense of self as a pleasurable feeling, which, in turn, influences SAT towards an event. This corroborates existing studies that found identity proxy (self-identification) as a predictor of SAT (Karagöz and Uysal, 2023; Alrawadieh et al., 2019).

Concerning EF, the results of this study also indicate that film festivals such as the PFC exceed hedonia since they elicit true self or self-connectedness related feelings (Lee et al., 2016). Assumedly this finding aligns with current participants’ motivations that point to their need of achieving personal meaningfulness. The PFC program design includes activities potentially leading to self-expressiveness, such as acting and directing workshops. As the majority of participants are young people, exploring opportunities for identity commitments by engaging in those activities can promote a sense of self-actualization and self-expression (Waterman et al., 2013). It can be concluded that if the film festival experience addresses such needs, participants’ satisfaction towards the event increases. In sum, by capturing situational appraisals of sense of self, the EF construct is capable of predicting participants’ satisfaction.

This study sheds light on the relation between eudaimonia and satisfaction, presenting theoretical and empirical support for considering eudaimonia as an antecedent of SAT. As practical implications, some insights follow from this study that illuminate the complexity of the film event experience and the need to pay attention more deeply to event participants’ needs and aspirations. More specifically, co-creative strategies in event design and management are increasingly capturing the attention of managers and destinations (Haanpaa et al., 2016; Crowther and Orefice, 2014). Consequently, recommendations lead to decisions on how to increase attendees’ participation and engagement. Festival planners and managers should emphasize activities that engage participants in co-creation processes, such as acting, directing, or screen playing, and in promoting group discussions about a specific movie with an appealing and social relevant theme. Additionally, the co-creative approach is also suitable to expedite participants’ involvement in the design stage of the film festival event, as their creative contributions may lead to format and activities proposition more adequate to induce EF and consequently SAT with the event. Storytelling-based activities with a co-creation orientation may include brainstorming or sketching with a purposive sample of participants (Antchack and Ramsbottom, 2020).

Lastly, to promote an image associated to positive human and community development to potential new attendees, institutional communications should explore the social bonding, self-expressiveness, and self-identity aspects of the PFC experience, showing the event as an opportunity for self-development and social-cultural interactions, in addition to the already familiar attractions. This is especially useful to induce interest in new goers and potential tourists to the city during the festival, increasing participation of non-locals in the event.

Limitations and future research

This study was limited by the fact that only a questionnaire was used for data collection. The generalizability of the results is limited because of the small sample size and the use of a convenience sample. In addition, the participants in the study were mostly residents and repeated attendees, so future studies would benefit from using a more multicultural sample base including first-time goers. These new variables expectedly may lead to different results, namely on the novelty dimension. To reach external validity, as previously suggested by Medeiros et al. (2023), larger and heterogenous samples are needed in future research. Moreover, the study participants were mostly women and on average 30 years old. Based on these considerations, future research directions include comparative studies using different types of demographics, e.g., first-time and repeat participants, domestic and international tourists, group or solo travellers could yield meaningful insights to add to those gained through the present study. Other directions are possible to increase the importance of this study’s model in the context of the research stream on the tourism and event experience, e.g. including EF in nomological nets may provide confirmatory evidence of its predictive power. Examination of antecedents of EF will greatly enhance the understanding of the eudaimonic experience. Two promising research paths follow from this study: one, the eudaimonic orientation (Huta, 2016c) and the other, the psychological traits (e.g., personality) (Anglim et al., 2020), which may contribute to uncover whether, or to which extent, eudaimonia is person- or context-triggered. With the expansion of analysis into these paths, it is also suggested that future studies should compare EF in different tourist settings, testing the hypotheses of whether EF is more related to personal traits or orientations, or otherwise to the experience provided by the specific type of tourism (volunteering, sun, sand, and sea, adventure, or religious). The same could be applied to events, for example, film festivals, music festivals, and sport events (examining spectators vs performers experiences), or food festivals.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

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

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research,authorship,and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (project UIDB/04020/2020).

ORCID iDs

Ana Cláudia Campos

Erose Sthapit

Lara Brunelle Almeida Freitas

Author Biographies

Sandro Alves de Medeiros holds a PhD in Business Administration from the Federal University of Minas Gerais,Brazil. Sandro is Full professor at Federal University of Alagoas and leads Competurhs research group for Competitiveness,Marketing,and Innovation in Tourism,Hospitality,and Services.

Ana Cláudia Campos holds a PhD in Tourism,a MA in Tourism Management,and a BA in Philosophy. Currently she is Assistant Researcher at CinTurs,the Research Centre for Tourism,Sustainability and Well-being,University of Algarve,Portugal. Her research interests are in tourism marketing,destination management and marketing,tourism experience,tourist psychology,storytelling,living labs,innovation and co-creation in tourism. Ana has published in tourism and hospitality journals,such as Tourism Management or Current Issues in Tourism.

Erose Sthapit is a Senior Lecturer at the Department of Marketing,Retail and Tourism at Manchester Metropolitan University. His research interests includes memorable tourism experience,interactive value formation and Airbnb. He has published in different tourism and hospitality journals,as Journal of Travel Research and International Journal of Hospitality Management.

Lara Brunelle Almeida Freitas holds a Master in Tourism and specialized in Tourism Planning. Currently she is a doctoral student in the PhD program in Regional Development and Agribusiness at State University of Western Paraná,Brazil. Lara is also a researcher at Tourism Group of Federal University of Alagoas and at the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel,Brazil. She lectures at the State University of Mato Grosso do Sul,Dourados,Brazil. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2203-1698

Tiago Savi Mondo graduated in Tourism and Hospitality and in Physical Education and specialized in Project Management. He holds a Master and a PhD in Administration,and a Post-Doctorate in Tourism. Tiago is Full Professor at the Federal Institute of Education,Science and Technology of Santa Catarina,Brazil.

References

Abdou

Mohamed

SAK

Khalil

AAF

, et al. (2022) Modeling the relationship between perceived service quality, tourist satisfaction, and tourists’ behavioural intentions amid COVID-19 pandemic: evidence of yoga tourists’ perspectives. Frontiers in Psychology 13: 1003650. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1003650.

AERA – American Educational Research Association (2014) American psychological association, and national council on measurement in education. In: Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. Washington: American Educational Research Association.

Afshardoost

Eshaghi

(2020) Destination image and tourist behavioural intentions: a meta-analysis. Tourism Management 81: 104154. DOI: 10.1016/j.tourman.2020.104154.

Ali

Rasoolimanesh

Sarstedt

, et al. (2018) An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) in hospitality research. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 30(1): 514–538. DOI: 10.1108/IJCHM-10-2016-0568.

Alrawadieh

Prayag

Alrawadieh

, et al. (2019) Self-identification with a heritage tourism site, visitors’ engagement and destination loyalty: the mediating effects of overall satisfaction. Service Industries Journal 39(7-8): 541–558. DOI: 10.1080/02642069.2018.1564284.

Anglim

Horwood

Smillie

, et al. (2020) Predicting psychological and subjective well-being from personality: a meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin 146(4): 279–323. DOI: 10.1037/bul0000226.

Antchack

Ramsbottom

(2020) The Fundamentals of Event Design. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

Armbrecht

Andersson

(2019) The event experience, hedonic and eudaimonic satisfaction and subjective well-being among sport event participants. Journal of Policy Research in Tourism, Leisure and Events 12(3): 457–477. DOI: 10.1080/19407963.2019.1695346.

Assaker

O’Connor

El-Haddad

(2020) Examining an integrated model of green image, perceived quality, satisfaction, trust, and loyalty in upscale hotels. Journal of Hospitality Marketing and Management 29(8): 1–22. DOI: 10.1080/19368623.2020.175137.

10.

Bachman

Hull

(2023) Hardly homogenous: a multi-year analysis of attendees at the vancouver queer film festival. Journal of Policy Research in Tourism, Leisure and Events 15(2): 157–171. DOI: 10.1080/19407963.2022.2037624.

11.

Bachman

Feng

Hull

(2022) Resident impacts for queer film festivals: assessing benefits and loyalty in vancouver, British columbia, Canada. Event Management 26(1): 107–126. DOI: 10.3727/152599521X16192004803647.

12.

Báez-Montenegro

Devesa-Fernández

(2014) Segmenting and profiling attendees of a film festival. International Journal of Event and Festival Management 5(2): 96–115. DOI: 10.1108/ijefm-08-2013-0021.

13.

Báez-Montenegro

Devesa-Fernández

(2017) Motivation, satisfaction and loyalty in the case of a film festival: differences between local and non-local participants. Journal of Cultural Economics 41(2): 173–195. DOI: 10.1007/s10824-017-9292-2.

14.

Báez-Montenegro

Devesa-Fernández

(2020) Understanding the determinants of festival attendee spending: the role of cultural capital. International Journal of Event and Festival Management 11(2): 145–159. DOI: 10.1108/IJEFM-04-2019-0023.

15.

Baker

Crompton

(2000) Quality, satisfaction and behavioral intentions. Annals of Tourism Research 27(3): 785–804. DOI: 10.1016/S0160-7383(99)00108-5.

16.

Baumeister

Vohs

(2002) The pursuit of meaningfulness in life. In: Snyder

Lopez

(eds), Handbook of Positive Psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 608–618.

17.

Bloomstervik

Prebensen

Campos

, et al. (2020) Novelty in tourism experiences: the influence of physical staging and human interaction on behavioural intentions. Current Issues in Tourism 24(20): 2921–2938. DOI: 10.1080/13683500.2020.1854197.

18.

Borges

Cunha

Lopes

(2020) The main factors that determine the intention to revisit a music festival. Journal of Policy Research in Tourism, Leisure and Events 13(3): 1–22. DOI: 10.1080/19407963.2020.1817051.

19.

Bosnjak

Brown

Lee

D-J

, et al. (2016) Self-expressiveness in sport tourism: determinants and consequences. Journal of Travel Research 55(1): 125–134. DOI: 10.1177/0047287514535845.

20.

Brown

(2013) Tourism: a catalyst for existential authenticity. Annals of Tourism Research 40(1): 176–190. DOI: 10.1016/j.annals.2012.08.004.

21.

Bryman

(2012) Social Research Methods. 4th edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

22.

Campos

Mendes

do Valle

, et al. (2016) Co-creation experiences: attention and memorability. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing 33(9): 1309–1336. DOI: 10.1080/10548408.2015.1118424.

23.

Campos

Pinto

Scott

(2020) Bottom-up factors of attention during the tourist experience: an empirical study. Current Issues in Tourism 23(24): 3111–3133. DOI: 10.1080/13683500.2019.1681383.

24.

Carvalho

Sheppard

(2022) Memorable experiences in language travel. Tourism and Hospitality Research 22(2): 149–163. DOI: 10.1177/14673584211013866.

25.

Chandralal

Valenzuela

F-R

(2015) Memorable tourism experiences: scale development. Contemporary Management Research 11(3): 291–310. DOI: 10.7903/cmr.13822.

26.

Chen

C-F

Chen

F-S

(2010) Experience quality, perceived value, satisfaction and behavioral intentions for heritage tourists. Tourism Management 31(1): 29–35. DOI: 10.1016/j.tourman.2009.02.00.

27.

Chen

Jiang

(2019) A multiple indicators multiple causes (mimic) model of the behavioral consequences of hotel guests. Tourism Management Perspectives 30: 197–207. DOI: 10.1016/j.tmp.2019.02.014.

28.

Chen

Robert (2018) Does a happy destination bring you happiness? Evidence from Swiss inbound tourism. Tourism Management 65: 256–266. DOI: 10.1016/j.tourman.2017.10.009.

29.

Chi

(2020) Reminiscing other people’s memories: conceptualizing and measuring vicarious nostalgia evoked by heritage tourism. Journal of Travel Research 61(1): 1–17. DOI: 10.1177/0047287520969904.

30.

Chi

Lee

Ahn

Y-j.

, et al. (2020) Tourist-perceived quality and loyalty intentions towards rural tourism in China. Sustainability 12(9): 3614. DOI: 10.3390/su12093614.

31.

Christou

(2020) Tourism experiences as the remedy to nostalgia: conceptualizing the nostalgia and tourism nexus. Current Issues in Tourism 23(5): 612–625. DOI: 10.1080/13683500.2018.1548582.

32.

Coelho

Gosling

(2018) Memorable tourism experience (MTE): scale proposal and test. Tourism and Management Studies 14(4): 15–24. DOI: 10.18089/tms.2018.14402.

33.

Cohen

(1988) Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd edition. Lawrence: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

34.

Cole

Illum

(2006) Examining the mediating role of festival visitors’ satisfaction in the relationship between service quality and behavioral intentions. Journal of Vacation Marketing 12(2): 160–173. DOI: 10.1177/1356766706062156.

35.

Cosma

Bota

Fleșeriu

, et al. (2016) Some considerations regarding motivations and overall perceptions on film festivals. Amfiteatru Economic 18(10): 929–943.

36.

Coudounaris

Sthapit

(2017) Antecedents of memorable tourism experience related to behavioral intentions. Psychology and Marketing 34(12): 1084–1093. DOI: 10.1002/mar.21048.

37.

Crompton

McKay

(1997) Motives of visitors attending festival events. Annals of Tourism Research 24(2): 425–439. DOI: 10.1016/s0160-7383(97)80010-2.

38.

Cronin

Brady

Hult

(2000) Assessing the effects of quality, value, and satisfaction on consumer behavioral intentions in service environments. Journal of Retailing 76(2): 193–218. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-4359(00)00028-2.

39.

Crowther

Orefice

(2014) Co-Creative events: analysis and illustrations. In: Richards

Marques

Mein

(eds), Event Design: Social Perspectives and Practices. London: Routledge, pp. 122–136.

40.

Del Bosque

San Martín

(2008) Tourist satisfaction; a cognitive-affective model. Annals of Tourism Research 35(2): 551–573. DOI: 10.1016/j.annals.2008.02.006.

41.

Demeter

MacInnes

Dolnicar

(2022) Defining and operationalizing eight forms of eudaimonia and hedonia and assessing tourism-specific context-dependency. Journal of Travel Research 62: 00472875221133042. DOI: 10.1177/00472875221133042.

42.

Do Valle

Assaker

(2015) Using partial least squares structural equation modeling in tourism research. Journal of Travel Research 55(6): 695–708. DOI: 10.1177/0047287515569779.

43.

Dolnicar

Coltman

Sharma

(2013) Do satisfied tourists really intend to come back? Three concerns with empirical studies of the link between satisfaction and behavioral intention. Journal of Travel Research 54(2): 152–178. DOI: 10.1177/0047287513513167.

44.

Dunman

Mattila

(2005) The role of affective factors on perceived cruise vacation value. Tourism Management 26(3): 311–323. DOI: 10.1016/j.tourman.2003.11.014.

45.

Farber

Hall

(2007) Emotion and environment: visitor’ extraordinary experiences along the Dalton Highway in Alaska. Journal of Leisure Research 39(2): 248–270. DOI: 10.1080/00222216.2007.11950107.

46.

Filep

Laing

(2019) Trends and directions in tourism and positive psychology. Journal of Travel Research 58(3): 343–354. DOI: 10.1177/0047287518759227.

47.

Filep

Volic

Lee

(2015) On positive psychology of events. Event Management 19(4): 495–507. DOI: 10.3727/152599515X14465748512687.

48.

Fytopoulou

Tampakis

Galatsidas

, et al. (2021) The role of events in local development: an analysis of residents’ perspectives and visitor satisfaction. Journal of Rural Studies 82: 54–63. DOI: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.01.018.

49.

Geus

Richards

Toepoel

(2016) Conceptualisation and operationalisation of event and festival experiences: creation of an event experience scale. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism 16(3): 274–296. DOI: 10.1080/15022250.2015.1101933.

50.

Gnanedesikan

(1997) Methods for Statistical Data Analysis of Multivariate Observations. 2nd edition. New York: Wiley Online Library.

51.

Gohary

Pourazizi

Madani

, et al. (2018) Examining Iranian tourists’ memorable experiences on destination satisfaction and behavioral intentions. Current Issues in Tourism 23(2): 131–136. DOI: 10.1080/13683500.2018.1560397.

52.

Haanpaa

García-Rosell

Tuulentie

(2016) Co-creating places through events: the case of a tourism community event in Finnish Lapland. In: Jepson

Clarke

(eds), Managing and Developing Communities, Festivals and Events. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, pp. 34–49.

53.

Hair

Black

Babin

, et al. (2014) Multivariate Data Analysis. 7th edition. Harlow: Pearson.

54.

Hair

Jr. Hult

GTM

Ringle

, et al. (2017) A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks: Sage publications.

55.

Hair

Jr. Sarstedt

Ringle

, et al. (2018) Advanced Issues in Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling. Thousand Oaks: Sage publications.

56.

Hair

Risher

Sarstedt

, et al. (2019) When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review 31(1): 2–24. DOI: 10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203.

57.

Hair

Howard

Nitzl

(2020) Assessing measurement model quality in PLS-SEM using confirmatory composite analysis. Journal of Business Research 109: 101–110. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.11.069.

58.

Hallak

Assaker

El-Haddad

(2018) Re-examining the relationships among perceived quality, value, satisfaction, and destination loyalty: a higher-order structural model. Journal of Vacation Marketing 24(2): 118–135. DOI: 10.1177/1356766717690572.

59.

Han

Bae

(2022) Roles of authenticity and nostalgia in cultural heritage tourists’ travel experience sharing behavior on social media. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research 27(4): 411–427. DOI: 10.1080/10941665.2022.2075776.

60.

Harter

(2002) Authenticity. In: Snyder

Lopez

(eds), Handbook of Positive Psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 382–394.

61.

Henseler

Ringle

Sarstedt

(2015) A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modelling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 43(1): 115–135. DOI: 10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8.

62.

Hosany

Sthapit

Björk

(2022). Memorable tourism experience: a review and research agenda. Psychology and Marketing 39: 1467–1486. DOI: 10.1002/mar.21665.

63.

Huta

(2013) Eudaimonia. In: David

Boniwell

Ayers

(eds), The Oxford Handbook of Happiness. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 201–213. Chapter 15.

64.

Huta

(2016a) Meaning as a subjective experience. Journal of Constructivist Psychology 30(1): 20–25. DOI: 10.1080/10720537.2015.1119088.

65.

Huta

(2016b) An overview of hedonic and eudaimonic well-being concepts. In: Reinecke

Oliver

(eds), Handbook of Media Use and Well-Being. 1st edition. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 14–33.

66.

Huta

(2016c) Eudaimonic and hedonic orientations: theoretical considerations and research findings. In: Vittersø

(ed), Handbook of Eudaimonic Well-Being. Cham: Springer, pp. 215–231.International Handbooks of Quality-of-Life.

67.

Huta

(2022) How distinct are eudaimonia and hedonia? It depends on how they are measured. Journal of Well-Being Assessment 4(3): 511–537. DOI: 10.1007/s41543-021-00046-4.

68.

Huta

Ryan

(2010) Pursuing pleasure or virtue: the differential and overlapping well-being benefits of hedonic and eudaimonic motives. Journal of Happiness Studies: An Interdisciplinary Forum on Subjective Well-Being 11(6): 735–762. DOI: 10.1007/s10902-009-9171-4.

69.

Huta

Waterman

(2014) Eudaimonia and its distinction from Hedonia: developing a classification and terminology for understanding conceptual and operational definitions. Journal of Happiness Studies 15(6): 1425–1456. DOI: 10.1007/s10902-013-9485-0.

70.

James

(1890) The principles of psychology. New York: Henry Holt. Retrieved from. https://ia800203.us.archive.org/12/items/theprinciplesofp01jameuoft/theprinciplesofp01jameuoft.pdf.

71.

Jain

Merchant

Roy

, et al. (2019) Developing an emic scale to measure ad-evoked nostalgia in a collectivist emerging market, India. Journal of Business Research 99: 140–156. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.02.039.

72.

Jani

Mwakyusa

JRP

(2021) Residents’ perception of festival impacts and satisfaction: a focus on Zanzibar international film festival (ZIFF). International Journal of Event and Festival Management 12(4): 365–379. DOI: 10.1108/IJEFM-02-2021-0022.

73.

Jeong

Kim

(2019) Determinants of behavioral intentions in the context of sports tourism with the aim of sustaining sporting destinations. Sustainability 11(11): 3073. DOI: 10.3390/su11113073.

74.

Karagöz

Uysal

(2023) The consequences of self-identification: examples from – two recreation experience settings. Leisure Sciences. DOI: 10.1080/01490400.2023.2227187.

75.

Kendall

Chan

JHT

Yeung

MCH

, et al. (2021) Do film festivals attract tourists? Current Issues in Tourism 24(11): 1482–1486. DOI: 10.1080/13683500.2020.1758041.

76.

Kim

Jamal

(2007) Tourist quest for existential authenticity. Annals of Tourism Research 34(1): 181–201. DOI: 10.1016/j.annals.2006.07.009.

77.

Kim

J-H

Ritchie

JRB

(2014) Cross-cultural validation of a memorable tourism experience scale (MTES). Journal of Travel Research 53(3): 323–335. DOI: 10.1177/0047287513496468.

78.

Kim

J-H

Ritchie

JRB

McCormick

(2012) Development of a scale to measure memorable tourism experiences. Journal of Travel Research 51(1): 12–25. DOI: 10.1177/0047287510385467.

79.

Kim

KKF

(2022) Two decades of customer experience research in hospitality and tourism: A bibliometric analysis and thematic content analysis. International Journal of Hospitality Management 100(January): 103082. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2021.103082.

80.

Kirillova

Lehto

(2015) An existential conceptualization of the vacation cycle. Annals of Tourism Research 55: 110–123. DOI: 10.1016/j.annals.2015.09.003.

81.

Kirillova

Lehto

Cai

(2016) Tourism and existential transformation: an empirical investigation. Journal of Travel Research 56(5): 638–650. DOI: 10.1177/0047287516650277.

82.

Kirillova

Lehto

Cai

(2017) What triggers transformative tourism experiences? Tourism Recreation Research 42(4): 498–511. DOI: 10.1080/02508281.2017.1342349.

83.

Kock

(2018) Minimum sample size estimation in PLS-SEM: an application in tourism and hospitality research. In: Ali

Rasoolimanesh

Cobanoglu

(eds), Applying Partial Least Squares in Tourism and Hospitality Research. Bingley: Emerald, pp. 1–16.

84.

Kock

Hadaya

(2018) Minimum sample size estimation in PLS-SEM: the inverse square root and gamma-exponential methods. Information Systems Journal 28(1): 227–261. DOI: 10.1111/isj.12131.

85.

Latan

(2018) PLS path modeling in hospitality and tourism research: the golden Age and days of future past. In: Ali

Rasoolimanesh

Cobanoglu

(eds), Applying Partial Least Squares in Tourism and Hospitality Research. Bingley: Emerald, pp. 53–83.

86.

Lee

T-H

Crompton

(1992) Measuring novelty seeking in tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 19(4): 732–751. DOI: 10.1016/0160-7383(92)90064-V.

87.

Lee

Jeong

(2019) Beyond the correlation between tourist eudaimonic and hedonic experiences: necessary condition analysis. Current Issues in Tourism 23(17): 2182–2194. DOI: 10.1080/13683500.2019.1611747.

88.

Lee

Jeong

(2021) Distinctive roles of tourist eudaimonic and hedonic experiences on satisfaction and place attachment: combined use of SEM and necessary condition analysis. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 47: 58–71. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhtm.2021.02.012.

89.

Lee

D-J

Sirgy

, et al. (2014) The well-being effects of self-expressiveness and hedonic enjoyment associated with physical exercise. Applied Research in Quality of Life 10(1): 141–159. DOI: 10.1007/s11482-014-9305-7.

90.

Lee

Pae

T-I

Bendle

(2016) The role of identity salience in the leisure behavior of film festival participants. Journal of Leisure Research 48(2): 156–177. DOI: 10.18666/jlr-2016-v48-i2-4687.

91.

Lee

SMF

Filep

Vada

, et al. (2022) Webcam travel: a preliminary examination of psychological well-being. Tourism and Hospitality Research. DOI: 10.1177/14673584221145818.

92.

Lengieza

Hunt

Swim

(2019) Measuring eudaimonic travel experiences. Annals of Tourism Research 74: 195–197. DOI: 10.1016/j.annals.2018.05.002.

93.

Leong

AMW

Yeh

S-S

Hsiao

Y-C

, et al. (2015) Nostalgia as travel motivation and its impact on tourists’ loyalty. Journal of Business Research 68(1): 81–86. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.05.003.

94.

Liu

Kirillova

(2021) The formative nature of graduation travel. Annals of Tourism Research Empirical Insights 2(2): 100029. DOI: 10.1016/j.annale.2021.100029.

95.

Mather

(2013) Novelty, attention, and challenges for developmental psychology. Frontiers in Psychology 4: 1–4. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00491.

96.

Matteucci

Filep

(2017) Eudaimonic tourist experiences: the case of flamenco. Leisure Studies 36(1): 39–52. DOI: 10.1080/02614367.2015.1085590.

97.

Meca

Ritchie

Beyers

, et al. (2015) Identity centrality and psychosocial functioning: a person-centered approach. Emerging Adulthood 3(5): 327–339. DOI: 10.1177/2167696815593183.

98.

Medeiros

Gosling

Vera

LAR

(2015) Emotions in negative tourism experiences: a study on the influence on dissatisfaction. [Emoções em experiências Negativas de Turismo: um estudo sobre a influência na insatisfação]. Turismo em Análise 26(1): 188–215. DOI: 10.11606/issn.1984-4867.v26i1p188-215.

99.

Medeiros

Gonçalves

Veiga

, et al. (2020) The most important trip for who I am: exploring the dimensions of the Eudaimonic Tourist Experience. Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa em Turismo 14(1): 14–33. DOI: 10.7784/rbtur.v14i1.1599.

100.

Medeiros

Campos

Freitas

LBA

, et al. (2023) Capturing eudaimonic feelings in tourism experience: a construct proposal and preliminary empirical evidence. Tourism and Hospitality Research. DOI: 10.1177/14673584231173512.

101.

Meeprom

Silanoi

(2020) Investigating the perceived quality of a special event and its influence on perceived value and behavioural intentions in a special event in Thailand. International Journal of Event and Festival Management 11(3): 337–355. DOI: 10.1108/ijefm-09-2019-0043.

102.

Mitas

Bastiaansen

(2018) Novelty: a mechanism of tourists’ enjoyment. Annals of Tourism Research 72: 98–108. DOI: 10.1016/j.annals.2018.07.002.

103.

Mondo

Marques

ORB

Gândara

JMG

(2020) Rio 2016 Olympics: analysis of the tourist perception of quality using TOURQUAL. Tourism and Management Studies 16(2): 26–34. DOI: 10.18089/tms.2020.160203.

104.

Morgan

(2006) Making space for experiences. Journal of Retail and Leisure Property 5(4): 305–313. DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.rlp.5100034.

105.

Muskat

Hörtnagl

Prayag

, et al. (2019) Perceived quality, authenticity, and price in tourists’ dining experiences: testing competing models of satisfaction and behavioral intentions. Journal of Vacation Marketing 25(4): 480–498. DOI: 10.1177/1356766718822675.

106.

Neuhofer

Celuch

(2020) Experience design and the dimensions of transformative festival experiences. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 32(9): 2881–2901. DOI: 10.1108/ijchm-01-2020-0008.

107.

Newman

Tay

Diener

(2013) Leisure and subjective well-being: a model of psychological mechanisms as mediating factors. Journal of Happiness Studies 15(3): 555–578. DOI: 10.1007/s10902-013-9435-x.

108.

Newman

Tay

Diener

(2014) Leisure and subjective well-being: A model of psychological mechanisms as mediating factors. Journal of Happiness Studies: An Interdisciplinary Forum on Subjective Well-Being 15(3): 555–578. DOI: 10.1007/s10902-013-9435-x.

109.

Norton

(1976) Personal Destinies; A Philosophy of Ethical Individualism. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

110.

Oliver

(1999) Whence consumer loyalty? Journal of Marketing 63(Special Issue): 33–44. DOI: 10.2307/1252099.

111.

Oliver

(2010) Satisfaction: A Behavioral Perspective on the Consumer. 2nd edition. New York: Routledge.

112.

Park

(2010) Measuring the experience economy of film festival participants. International Journal of Tourism Sciences 10(2): 35–54. DOI: 10.1080/15980634.2010.11434625.

113.

Park

Lee

Park

(2011) Service quality dimensions perceived by film festivals visitors. Event Management 15(1): 49–61. DOI: 10.3727/152599511x12990855575141.

114.

Pilarska

(2014) Self-construal as a mediator between identity structure and subjective well-being. Current Psychology 33(2): 130–154. DOI: 10.1007/s12144-013-9202-5.

115.

Pituch

Stevens

(2016) Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. In: Analyses with SAS and IBM’s SPSS. 6th edition. New York: Routledge.

116.

Pivac

Blešić

Kovačić

, et al. (2019) Visitors’ satisfaction, perceived quality, and behavioral intentions: the case study of Exit Festival. Journal of the Geographical Institute Jovan Cvijic SASA 69(2): 123–134. DOI: 10.2298/IJGI1902123P.

117.

Preckel

Brunner

(2017) Nomological nets. In: Zeigler-Hill

Shackelford

(eds), Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences. Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 1–4.

118.

Rajaobelina

Dusseault

Ricard

(2019) The mediating role of place attachment in experience and word of mouth: the case of music and film festivals. International Journal of Arts Management 21(2): 43–54. http://www.jstor.org/stable/45221714.

119.

Rasoolimanesh

Seyfi

Rather

, et al. (2022) Investigating the mediating role of visitor satisfaction in the relationship between memorable tourism experiences and behavioral intentions in heritage tourism context. Tourism Review 77(2): 687–709. DOI: 10.1108/TR-02-2021-0086.

120.

Raykov

(1997) Estimation of composite reliability for congeneric measures. Applied Psychological Measurement 21(2): 173–184. DOI: 10.1177/01466216970212006.

121.

Ritchie

Meca

Madrazo

, et al. (2013) Identity dimensions and related processes in emerging adulthood: helpful or harmful? Journal of Clinical Psychology 69(4): 415–432. DOI: 10.1002/jclp.21960.

122.

Ringle

Sarstedt

(2016) Gain more insight from your PLS-SEM results. Industrial Management and Data Systems 116(9): 1865–1886. DOI: 10.1108/imds-10-2015-0449.

123.

Rodríguez-Campo

Alén-González

Antonio Fraiz-Brea

, et al. (2019) A holistic understanding of the emotional experience of festival attendees. Leisure Sciences 44(4): 421–439. DOI: 10.1080/01490400.2019.1597790.

124.

Ryff

Singer

(2008) Know thyself and become what you are: a eudaimonic approach to psychological well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies 9(1): 13–39. DOI: 10.1007/s10902-006-9019-0.

125.

Saragih

Amelia

(2020) Segmentation of music festival visitors by values of hedonia, life satisfaction and eudaimonia. International Journal of Event and Festival Management 11(4): 453–472. DOI: 10.1108/ijefm-03-2020-0016.

126.

Sarstedt

Ringle

Hair

(2021) Partial least squares structural equation modeling. In: Homburg

Klarmann

Vomberg

(eds), Handbook of Market Research. Cham: Springer Nature, pp. 587–632.

127.

Schwartz

Donnellan

MB.

Ravert

, et al. (2013) Identity development, personality, and well-being in adolescence and emerging adulthood: Theory, research, and recent advances. In: Lerner

Easterbrooks

Mistry

, et al. (eds), Handbook of psychology: Developmental psychology. New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons, Inc, pp. 339–364.

128.

Schlegel

Hicks

Christy

(2016) The eudaimonics of the true self. In: Vittersø

(ed), Handbook of Eudaimonic Well-Being. Cham: Springer, pp. 205–213.International Handbooks of Quality-of-Life.

129.

Selem

Ahmad

Belwal

, et al. (2022) Fear of COVID-19, hotel employee outcomes and workplace health and safety management practices: evidence from Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt. Tourism and Hospitality Research. DOI: 10.1177/14673584221119374.

130.

Shmueli

Ray

Estrada

JMV

, et al. (2016) The elephant in the room: predictive performance of PLS models. Journal of Business Research 69(10): 4552–4564. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.03.049.

131.

Shmueli

Sarstedt

Hair

, et al. (2019) Predictive model assessment in PLS-SEM: guidelines for using PLSpredict. European Journal of Marketing 53(11): 2322–2347. DOI: 10.1108/EJM-02-2019-0189.

132.

Sirgy

Uysal

(2016) Developing a eudaimonia research agenda in travel and tourism. In: Vittersø

(ed), Handbook of Eudaimonic Well-Being. Springer, pp. 485–496.

133.

Skavronskaya

Moyle

Scott

(2020) The experience of novelty and the novelty of experience. Frontiers in Psychology 11: 322. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00322.

134.

Smallenbroek

Zelenski

Whelan

(2017) Authenticity as a eudaimonic construct: the relationships among authenticity, values, and valence. The Journal of Positive Psychology 12(2): 197–209. DOI: 10.1080/17439760.2016.1187198.

135.

Sthapit

Del Chiappa

Coudounaris

, et al. (2019) Tourism experiences, memorability and behavioural intentions: a study of tourists in Sardinia, Italy. Tourism Review 75(3): 533–558. DOI: 10.1108/tr-03-2019-0102.

136.

Sthapit

Coudounaris

Björk

(2019) Extending the memorable tourism experience construct: an investigation of memories of local food experiences. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism 19(4–5): 333–353. DOI: 10.1080/15022250.2019.1689530.

137.

Tanford

Jung

(2017) Festival attributes and perceptions: a meta-analysis of relationships with satisfaction and loyalty. Tourism Management 61: 209–220. DOI: 10.1016/j.tourman.2017.02.005.

138.

Tkaczynski

(2013) Festival performance (FESTPERF) revisited: service quality and special events. Advances in Hospitality and Leisure 9: 227–235.

139.

Toyama

Yamada

(2012) The Relationships among tourist novelty, familiarity, satisfaction, and destination loyalty: beyond the novelty-familiarity continuum. International Journal of Marketing Studies 4(6): 10–18. DOI: 10.5539/ijms.v4n6p10.

140.

Toyama

Yamada

(2016) Tourists’ novelty and familiarity: their effects on satisfaction and destination loyalty. In: Travel and Tourism Research Association: Advancing Tourism Research Globally, vol. 15. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/ttra/2012/Visual/15.

141.

Vada

Prentice

Scott

, et al. (2020) Positive psychology and tourist well-being: a systematic literature review. Tourism Management Perspectives 33: 100631. DOI: 10.1016/j.tmp.2019.100631.

142.

Verma

Rajendran

(2021) Does historical nostalgia predict tourists’ delight and their destination loyalty intention for the world cultural heritage site of Mahabalipuram, India? Tourism Analysis 26(4): 249–264. DOI: 10.3727/108354220X15949439257845.

143.

Vittersø

(2011) Recreate or create? Leisure as an arena for recovery and change. In: Biswas-Diener

(ed), Positive Psychology as Social Change. London: Springer, pp. 293–308.

144.

Vittersø

Prebensen

Hetland

, et al. (2017) The emotional traveler: happiness and engagement as predictors of behavioral intentions among tourists in northern norway. Advances in Hospitality and Leisure 13: 3–16. DOI: 10.1108/s1745-354220170000013001.

145.

Wang

Kao

S-y

(2023) Cultural events and the city: The migration of FIRST International Film Festival from Beijing to Xining, China. City, Culture and Society 32: 100506. DOI: 10.1016/j.ccs.2023.100506.

146.

Waterman

(1995) Eudaimonic theory: Self-realization and the collective good. In: Kurtines

Gewirtz

(eds), Moral development: An introduction. New Jersey: Allyn & Bacon, pp. 255–278.

147.

Waterman

(1990) Personal expressiveness: philosophical and psychological foundations. The Journal of Mind and Behavior 11(1): 47–73. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43853486.

148.

Waterman

(1993) Two conceptions of happiness: contrasts of personal expressiveness (eudaimonia) and hedonic enjoyment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 64(4): 678–691. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.64.4.678.

149.

Waterman

(2005) When effort is enjoyed: two studies of intrinsic motivation for personally salient activities. Motivation and Emotion 29(3): 165–188. DOI: 10.1007/s11031-005-9440-4.

150.

Waterman

Schwartz

Conti

(2008) The implications of two conceptions of happiness (hedonic enjoyment and eudaimonia) for the understanding of intrinsic motivation. Journal of Happiness Studies 9(1): 41–79. DOI: 10.1007/s10902-006-9020-7.

151.

Waterman

Schwartz

Hardy

, et al. (2013) Good choices, poor choices. Emerging Adulthood 1(3): 163–174. DOI: 10.1177/2167696813484004.

152.

Wise

Harris

(eds), (2019) Events, Places and Societies. Abingdon: Routledge.

153.

Wilson

Harris

(2006) Meaningful travel: women, independent travel and the search for self and meaning. Tourism: An International Interdisciplinary Journal 54(2): 161–172.

154.

Yan

Mak

(2021) Service encounter failure, negative destination emotion and behavioral intention: an experimental study of taxi service. Tourism Management Perspectives 40: 100886. DOI: 10.1016/j.tmp.2021.100886.

155.

Yolal

Özdemir

Batmaz

(2019) Multidimensional scaling of spectators’ motivations to attend a film festival. Journal of Convention & Event Tourism 20(1): 64–83. DOI: 10.1080/15470148.2018.1563012.

156.

Žabkar

Brenčič

Dmitrović

(2010) Modelling perceived quality, visitor satisfaction and behavioural intentions at the destination level. Tourism Management 31(4): 537–546. DOI: 10.1016/j.tourman.2009.06.005.

157.

Zhang

Park

K-S

Song

(2021) Tourists’ motivation, place attachment, satisfaction and support behavior for festivals in the migrant region of China. Sustainability 13(9): 5210. DOI: 10.3390/su13095210.

158.

Zhou

M-Y

Filep

, et al. (2021) Exploring well-being outcomes at an iconic Chinese LGBT event: a PERMA model perspective. Tourism Management Perspectives 40: 100905. DOI: 10.1016/j.tmp.2021.100905.

Examining the antecedents and outcomes of satisfaction in film festival context: Further evidence of validity of the eudaimonic feelings construct

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Theoretical background

Eudaimonic feelings

Hypothesis development

Satisfaction

Novelty

Local culture

Nostalgia

Perceived quality

Behavioural intentions

Method

Setting

Research design and sample

Measurement

Data analysis methods

Results

Measurement model

Structural model

Model’s predictive power assessment

Discussion and conclusions

Limitations and future research

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

Funding

ORCID iDs

Author Biographies

References