Image variations of Turkey by familiarity index: informational and experiential dimensions.

By Seyhmus Baloglu. 2001

501 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Marketing, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d721117d937d6078172251ebaf9a66f307638f4e

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Marketing

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

The moderating role of past experience in the formation of a tourist destination's image and in tourists’ behavioural intentions (2013, background): “Baloglu ( 2001 ) demonstrates that a destination's attributes (for example, attractions, quality of experience and local resources), the affective image and the overall image, are more positive, the greater the familiarity with that destination.”
How Country Image Affects Tourists’ Destination Evaluations: A Moderated Mediation Approach (2018, background): “Baloglu (2001) combined these two dimensions to define familiarity: informational, operationalized as the amount of information sources, and experiential, operationalized as nonvisitor, first-timer, or repeater.”
Country Versus Destination Image in a Developing Country (2010, background): “Only more recent investigations have accepted the importance of including both dimensions (Baloglu, 2001; Baloglu & McCleary; Beerli & Martin, 2004; Kim & Richardson, 2003).”
The Relationships among Tourist Novelty, Familiarity, Satisfaction, and Destination Loyalty: Beyond the Novelty-familiarity Continuum (2012, background): “From another stand-point, Baloglu (2001) determined a positive relationship between familiarity and destination image. Milman and Pizam (1995) also showed that familiarity influences the likelihood of visitation.”
Investigating the Role of Prior Knowledge in Tourist Decision Making (2014, background): “…in understanding the effects of prior visitation to a destination on travel intentions has found that travelers who were familiar with the destination via their past travel experiences evaluated a destination more fairly and were more likely to revisit (Baloglu 2001; Milman and Pizam 1995).”
A mediating role of destination image in the relationship between event quality, perceived value, and behavioral intention (2013, background): “This supports the results of prior studies that found a significant role of the destination image in predicting tourist behaviors (Assaker et al., 2011; Baloglu, 2001; Bigne et al., 2001; Castro et al., 2007; Chen & Tsai, 2007; Fakeye & Crompton, 1991).”
Destination Image Components and Word-of-Mouth Intentions in Urban Tourism: A Multigroup Approach (2018, background): “There are a number of stakeholders that play a role in the formation process of a destination’s image, including local residents, existing and future tourists (Bornhorst, Ritchie, & Sheehan, 2010; Merrilees, Miller, & Herington, 2009), who are usually influenced by the levels of familiarity with the”
Destination loyalty explained through place attachment, destination familiarity and destination image (2020, methodology): “Self-rated familiarity with the destination was captured via three proxy items targeting informational familiarity (“I have read books/blogs/travel guides about Greece”) and self-rated familiarity (“I know Greece very well”; “I can find my way around easily”) (Baloglu, 2001; Frias et al., 2008; Hamm”