Content uploaded by Hugh Wilkins
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Hugh Wilkins on Jan 09, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
Souvenirs: What and why we buy
Hugh Wilkins
Griffith University
Hugh Wilkins, PhD
Associate Professor
Department of Tourism, Leisure, Hotel & Sport Management
Griffith University
Gold Coast campus
Queensland 4222
Australia.
Tel: +61 (7) 5552 8011
Fax: +61(7) 5552 7007
E-mail: h.wilkins@griffith.edu.au
Keywords: Souvenirs, purchase motivation, evidence, memory, gifts
Original submission 27 March, 2009; Accepted 7 December, 2009
2
Abstract
The souvenir is an important component of the tourist experience with most
tourists bringing back mementos and souvenirs as evidence. People like to be reminded of
special moments in their lives and to hold evidence of those special moments. However,
despite the considerable previous research into souvenirs and purchase behavior, little
research exists that investigates the motivations for souvenir purchase. Additionally, there
has been little investigation of the impact of gender on the souvenirs purchased and the
motivations for purchase. This research addresses these gaps in the literature and
evaluates the souvenir purchase behavior of tourists. The research identifies the core
importance of the souvenir as evidence of the experience as well as the roles of memory
and as gifts.
Keywords: Souvenirs, purchase motivation, evidence, memory, gifts
3
Introduction
The purchase of mementos and souvenirs is an established behavior associated
with many activities, including travel and other leisure activities. Few people will take a
vacation without acquiring some form of evidence to tangibilise the experiences gained
(Gordon 1986; Littrell et al. 1994). The type of evidence will vary from person to person
and from experience to experience, from the artistic to the gaudy, from the unique to the
commonplace, from a T-shirt to a tapestry or a shell to a snow-scene.
Shopping is a major tourist activity (Fairhurst, Costello, and Holmes 2007; Kim
and Littrell 2001), with souvenir purchases forming a significant component of the
shopping expenditure (Littrell et al. 1994; Lehto et al. 2004). Previous research has
suggested expenditure on shopping comprises almost a third of the total travel spend
(Littrell et al. 1994; Fairhurst, Costello, and Holmes 2007). Although there has been a
considerable volume of research undertaken on the topic of souvenirs and the types of
souvenirs purchased, further research is still needed on shopping and souvenir purchases
within tourism (Lehto et al. 2004). Previous research has tended to focus on the types,
uses and functions (Love and Sheldon 1998). Despite the significance of the souvenir in
the tourism experience (Shenhav-Keller 1993; Lehto et al. 2004), little research has been
found that investigates the usage and motivations for souvenir purchase. As part of a
survey on vacations and the activities contained, including shopping, data were collected
on souvenir purchase behavior and motivations.
A sequential mixed methods approach was used to identify the souvenirs
purchased and the motivations for souvenir purchase. Derived from the qualitative data
and the literature, scales in relation to the role of souvenirs as gifts, as evidence, and in
4
relation to memory were developed. The scale structures were subjected to confirmatory
factor analysis. The data were also examined by gender to identify if there was a gender
effect in the souvenirs purchased and the motivations for purchase. This paper will
continue with a review of the relevant literature before proceeding to provide the details
on the methodology and data collection approaches used. The results are then provided,
followed by a discussion of the findings.
Literature Review
Tourism has been described as a sacred journey (Graburn 1989), with there being a
need for people to bring back mementos and souvenirs of the “sacred, extraordinary time
or space” (Gordon, 1986 page 136), not only to aid recollection of the experience, but also
to prove it (Gordon 1986; Swanson 2004; Littrell et al. 1994). The gathering of souvenirs
makes an experience tangible, either for consumption by others or as a means of
prolonging the experience for one’s own consumption (Gordon 1986; MacCannell 1989).
Zauberman, Ratner & Kim (2009) have coined the term ‘strategic memory protection’ to
describe actions designed to encourage memory of important life events, with souvenirs
being an example of a physical object intended to protect the memory of important life
events, such as vacations (Zauberman, Ratner, and Kim 2009). There are many
motivations for the purchase of souvenirs including the role of souvenirs as gifts (Kim and
Littrell 2001; Gordon 1986), as signs (Gordon 1986) and as a reminder (Littrell et al.
1994; Swanson 2004). The role of souvenirs as gifts includes both the role of
reintegration and desacralisation (Gordon 1986), as well as gift giving and self gifting
behaviors (Ward and Tran 2007).
5
Although there have been a number of studies of souvenirs, the previous research
has mainly focused on souvenir types and functions, as opposed to the meanings given to
the souvenirs (Love and Sheldon 1998). The research has mainly polarized between that
on artisan producers and tourist consumers (Kim and Littrell 2001) and has identified a
range of souvenir products from mass produced products to specialty items and antiques
(Swanson and Horridge 2004).
Research has also shown that women tend to purchase souvenirs more frequently
than men (Littrell, Anderson, and Brown 1993), with souvenirs being more
psychologically important to many women tourists (Anderson and Littrell 1996).
Although it appears there may be gender differences regarding travel and tourism
products, there has been relatively little investigation into this subject (Reisinger and
Mavondo 2001), and research into souvenirs overall is limited (Swanson and Horridge
2006). Investigating gender differences is an important component of any study into
tourism behavior as men and women consume tourism products differently (Swain 1995).
There have been a small number of studies investigating gender differences in
purchasing behavior. Littrell (1990) investigated the symbolic meaning of textile crafts
for tourists and examined gender differences. In addition, there have been studies into
gender identity and material symbols (Dittmara, Beattieb, and Frieseb 1995), cognitive
and affective impulse buying and gender differences (Coley and Burgess 2003) and into
partners’ involvement in tourism decision processes (Zalatan 1998).
A further study was conducted by Littrell, Anderson and Brown (1993) into the
definition of authentic craft souvenirs. No gender differences were found regarding the
definition of authenticity for tourist crafts. This finding was in contrast to that of
6
Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton, 1981 (as cited in Littrell, Anderson & Brown,
1993) who found that men and women do differ regarding the symbolic attachment and
meaning of objects in the home.
Data Collection and Methodology
A sequential mixed methods research approach was adopted. Mixed methods
research includes both qualitative and quantitative data collection approaches within one
study (Tashakkori and Teddlie 2003) and builds on the strengths of both quantitative and
qualitative research, whilst also moderating any weaknesses associated with individual
research approaches (Johnson and Onwuegbuzie 2004). The review of the literature
identified a lack of prior research into the reasons for purchase and the planned use of the
souvenirs. In order to gain further understanding of souvenir purchase behavior in
relation to these questions, a qualitative study was undertaken through focus groups, with
the results being used as the basis for the formation of scales for use in the quantitative
stage of the research.
The qualitative data were collected through three focus groups, with this element
of the research providing greater understanding of the motivations for souvenir purchase
not previously addressed in the literature. Each focus group comprised between six and
eight respondents and lasted between 60 and 90 minutes. Respondents comprised staff
and postgraduate students at a university in Queensland, Australia. The participants were
asked about their souvenir purchases and the motivations and use of souvenirs. The focus
groups were recorded, transcribed and content analyzed using Nvivo, a qualitative
analysis software package. Themes identified from the content analysis were developed
7
into items for inclusion in the self administered survey. The items derived from the
focus group data were supported and extended by items derived from the literature.
A rigorous scale development process, as recommended by Churchill (1979), was
adopted. The first stage of the process was to use expert opinion to establish content
validity. The survey instrument was examined by a number of academic experts in the
field to ensure the items derived from the qualitative research and the literatures were
appropriate and relevant. The scales were subjected to a pilot study with exploratory
principal components analysis to ensure item purity. Items that failed to cleanly load onto
one dimension were amended to improve item clarification. For all scales, except that on
souvenir purchases, respondents indicated their agreement with the item on a seven point
Likert type scale, ranging from Strongly Disagree (1) to Strongly Agree (7). The use of a
seven point Likert scale provides maximum response separation (Neuman 2003). The
souvenir purchases scale, asking how often consumers would buy the following types of
products, used a five point Likert type scale, ranging from Never (1) to Always (5).
A web based survey instrument was used to collect the quantitative data. An email was
sent to contacts of the researcher and students at a large publically funded university in
Queensland, Australia. The email asked them to complete the online survey and to
forward the email to family, friends and colleagues to broaden distribution. The email
gave a brief description of the research project and provided a hotlink to the web address.
As an incentive to participate in the research a prize draw of a week’s accommodation in a
resort was provided. It is not possible to define the response rate as it is not known how
many potential respondents received the invitation to participate. A total of 3,231
completed and usable survey responses were received. The respondent profile was
8
appropriate, with 92.1 percent of respondents having taken either a domestic or
international vacation within the last year. The majority of the respondents identified they
had taken a domestic holiday (86.1%), with over half (55.6%) having taken more than one
domestic holiday in the last year. A smaller proportion (42.5%) had taken an international
holiday, with relatively few (11.7%) having taken more than one international holiday.
Each scale was subjected to an exploratory principal components analysis using an
oblique rotation to identify complex and weak items. An oblique rotation was used as it is
a recommended approach when correlation between components is anticipated (Hair et al.
1998). As the sample size exceeded 350, a factor loading of 0.40 was deemed acceptable
(Hair et al. 1998). Complex items, those that load significantly onto more than one
component, and weak items were removed. The Cronbach alpha for the resultant scales
was used to measure the scale reliability. The scale structures were then subjected to
confirmatory factor analysis. As recommended by Bagozzi and Heatherton (1994), a
partial disaggregation was used, with each dimension represented as a separate latent
variable measured by composites of subscales (Bagozzi and Heatherton 1994). The use of
a partial disaggregation model provides a more detailed representation of constructs and
supports the evaluation of discriminant validity. (Churchill 1979)
Due to the sensitivity of fit indices to sample size, a random sample of 300
respondents was selected from the data to ascertain level of fit (Marsh, Balla, and
McDonald 1988). The confirmatory factor analysis fit indices confirmed the structure,
with all results within the recommended ranges. A second random sample of 300
respondents was then selected from the remaining data to retest the results. The structure
of the dimension was supported by the retest sample. Both convergent and discriminant
9
validities were established. Convergent validity was demonstrated with inter-dimension
correlations all significant (p<0.01) (Bagozzi, Yi, and Phillips 1991). Discriminant
validity was also established with the AVE for each dimension being greater than the
square of the inter-correlations (Fornell and Larcker 1981). The fit indices for the
confirmatory factor analysis are provided in Table 1. The table provides the results for the
overall dimension and the individual constructs.
INSERT TABLE 1 HERE
Based on the literature, it was considered likely there would be gender effects in
both purchase behavior and purchase motivations. A multiple analysis of variance
(MANOVA) was undertaken to identify if there were any significant differences between
genders in the souvenirs purchased or the motivations for purchase.
Results
The data from the focus groups are provided in conjunction with the results from
the germane items in the survey to provide results that integrate the qualitative and
quantitative data.
Souvenir Purchases
During the focus groups, respondents mentioned a number of different souvenir
items, from rugs and artwork to T-shirts and caps. The items ranged from a focus on
authenticity to a focus on novelty. One respondent commented “they were the local
product and although they were souvenirs, they were not necessarily bought from a
10
souvenir shop”. Based on the qualitative research and the literature, souvenir purchases
were grouped into eight categories of purchase type. Focus group respondents identified
items including photographs and postcards, branded clothing, regional specialty art and
craft and published material. Other items were identified from the literature, and the
souvenir purchases were formed into categories on the basis of expert opinion.
The quantitative results showed little gender effect on the ranking of frequency of
souvenir purchases. There was, however, a significant difference in the likelihood of
purchase between the genders for five of the eight categories, with women being the more
frequent consumers for all items. In the three items where there was no significant
difference, males were marginally the more frequent purchasers of branded clothing,
published materials and products that can be purchased at a discounted price. The most
popular souvenir category for both genders was ‘Photographs, postcards and paintings of
the region’ with nearly 60% of women and over 43% of males often, or always,
purchasing these items. For women, the second most popular category was regional
specialty arts and crafts, followed by other local specialty products. For males, other local
specialty products was the second most frequent purchase, followed by ‘Perfume,
electrical goods, cameras or other similar goods’ that can be purchased at a discounted
price. This latter category was also popular amongst women. The souvenir categories
and the purchase frequency by gender are provided in Table 2.
INSERT TABLE 2 HERE
11
In Table 3 the items and the MANOVA results for the souvenir purchase
categories by gender are provided. The existence of multivariate differences was
identified, with Pillai’s Trace results being significant (p< 0.01).
INSERT TABLE 3 HERE
Souvenirs as Gifts
There were a number of references to the purchase of souvenirs as gifts for family
and friends in the qualitative data. In some cases, these were evidently associated with
normal gift giving rituals, for example “I will tend to combine Christmas and birthday
presents with souvenirs I buy overseas” and “I specifically look out for little gifts or
souvenirs that I can give to nieces and nephews as birthday and Christmas presents”.
Other respondents identified gift giving as part of their vacation ritual through statements
such as “I generally buy gifts for my family’ and “Most of my souvenirs are gift oriented”.
The focus groups very clearly identified the importance of the gift giving rituals
associated with vacations and souvenir purchase. Seven items were included in the survey
instrument on the role of souvenirs as gifts. A principal components analysis with an
oblique rotation identified two components. The seven item scale had a Cronbach alpha
of 0.754, with the removal of no items increasing overall reliability.
There was a significant gender effect (p< 0.01) for the dimension as a composite
and for five of the seven items. In particular, there was a significant difference between
the genders for all items in component one which was named ‘Holiday gifts’, with females
being more likely to purchase these gifts than males. All respondents showed a strong
12
inclination to provide holiday gifts, with over 75% of females purchasing and 70% of
males. The second component reflected souvenir purchase as a means of buying gifts for
other occasions, such as birthday and Christmas presents, and received lower support
(females 57%; males 56%). The items, the component loadings and the MANOVA
results are reported in Table 4. Multivariate differences were identified with Pillai’s Trace
results being significant (p< 0.01).
INSERT TABLE 4 HERE
Souvenirs as Memory
The role of memory was very important, with many respondents commenting on
the need for souvenirs to remind them of special occasions. The role of the souvenir as a
facilitator of memory is captured in comments such as “I see tourist souveniring as part of
a larger life plan, which is to collect things so that I can have memories” and “I really
treasure the things which I can look at and remember where I’ve been and what I’ve
done”. Other comments identified the need for tangible evidence to re-live the experience
“I want to capture the event and hold on to it for a bit longer” and to retain the experience
as “my memory fades over time”. Another respondent, who had not travelled for several
years, said “having things around me reminds me I did have a life” and, in a similar vein,
another commented “it’s nice to look back on it and remember this is where I’ve been and
done with my life”.
13
Six items were included in the survey related to souvenirs as contributors to the
memory of travel experiences. The scale comprised a single component, with a Cronbach
alpha of 0.909.
The gender effect was significant (p<0.01) for the dimension as a whole and for all
items in this scale. In all items, females showed more importance for the role of the
souvenir as an aide memoire . For females, this role was in all cases above 5.4 on a 7
point scale. For males, there was still a very strong level of importance, but slightly
lower, with results ranging from 5.05 to 5.43. The results for the role of souvenirs as
memories are provided in Table 5. Multivariate differences were identified, with Pillai’s
Trace results being significant (p< 0.01).
INSERT TABLE 5 HERE
Souvenirs as Evidence
There were two interrelated themes in this heading, souvenirs as conversation
pieces and as evidence. Examples of respondent comments on the role of the souvenir as
a conversation piece include “people say oh that’s nice, and you have the opportunity of
talking about your holiday”; “I have it on display and talk about it”; “because you have
something which is little different….it is a conversation piece” and “that’s been a great
souvenir tool – a great conversation piece”. In contrast, other respondents only focused
on the role of the souvenir as evidence, with comments such as “I bought plates which are
representative of the country”; “so it’s more you being different from other people
because you’ve been there” and “I don’t use them, they are on display”.
14
The data from this theme were very focused on public evidence of the travel
destination and experience. The two themes of conversation pieces and evidence
identified from the qualitative data comprised one scale with six items. The scale
comprised a single component with a Cronbach alpha of 0.841.
The gender effect was significant at p < 0.01 for the dimension. Analysis
identified that for five of the items in the scale, gender was a significant effect (p<0.01)
and at p < 0.05 for the final item. Again, the effect was stronger for females than males
across all items. Multivariate differences were identified, with Pillai’s Trace results being
significant (p< 0.01). The results for the role of souvenirs as memories are provided in
Table 6.
INSERT TABLE 6 HERE
Effect of purchase motivation on souvenir purchase
The qualitative data indicated a relationship between the purchase motivations and
the type of souvenir purchased. On this basis it was hypothesized that the purchase
motivations would be antecedent to, and affect the types of souvenirs purchased.
As a result, the data were analyzed using hierarchical multiple regression. This
analysis enables the inclusion of direct and moderating effects as sequential components,
thus enabling the identification of the additional explanation provided by the moderating
variables (Pedhazur 1997; Francis 2004; Hair et al. 1998; Tabachnick and Fidell 2001;
Aguinis 1995). The use of hierarchical multiple regression or incremental partitioning of
variance (Pedhazur 1997) is a recommended approach in moderated multiple regression,
15
in which the impact of a moderating variable on the relationship between two variables
is measured (Aguinis 1995).
As can be seen in Table 7, the predictors of evidence, memory and gift as purchase
motivations gain a R2 of 0.268 for the souvenir purchase choice for males and 0.284 for
females. It should be noted that for both sexes the role of evidence is the principal
influence of the souvenir selected. The second most important factor was the role of gift,
and memory was not significant for males.
INSERT TABLE 7 HERE
Discussion and Conclusions
This research provides new understanding of a number of facets of consumer
purchase behavior in relation to souvenirs. In particular, the significant gender
differences, both in the souvenirs purchased and the motivations for purchase, provides
new insights. This information will be of relevance to retailers in tourism destinations, as
it will enable them to structure retail outlets to be attractive and relevant to consumers.
There are a number of findings deriving from this research. Firstly, although
there has been relatively little investigation into gender differences regarding travel and
tourism products (Reisinger and Mavondo 2001), previous research has found that women
tend to purchase souvenirs more frequently than men (Littrell, Anderson, and Brown
1993). This research supports this finding across most dimensions of souvenirs. Men are
more likely to purchase discounted and branded products, whilst women are more likely
to purchase other categories of souvenirs and, in particular, destination specific products.
16
Secondly, in relation to the souvenirs purchased, there is evidence of the
importance of authenticity for souvenir purchases. Respondents indicated they were
infrequent purchasers of the souvenir category of ‘Non-regional arts and crafts, such as
paintings, stuffed animals or toys, ornaments’, with people identifying purchase as either
Never or Rarely on more than fifty percent of travel occasions. Somewhat surprisingly,
given the product range found in many souvenir shops, ‘Hats, caps or other clothing
branded with the destination, hotel or attraction’ were also not frequently purchased, with
less than twenty per cent of respondents indicating they Always or Often purchased these
products. Although, as may be expected, the category comprising photographs, postcards
and paintings of the region was the most popular purchase, the next most popular
categories were both regional specific - regional arts and crafts and local specialty
products. This clearly demonstrates that people want to purchase souvenirs reflective of
the region, rather than more general items. The importance of a regional connection to the
souvenir was clearly evident in both the qualitative and quantitative results. This finding
should encourage souvenir retailers to change the product range and focus on authenticity.
Thirdly, the findings in relation to purchase motivations provide important
understanding of consumer behavior. There is strong support identified for the role of
souvenirs as gifts, with this support being stronger amongst females. These findings
support and extend the previous research of Gordon (1986) and Ward and Tran (2007).
This dimension was structured into two components with a subtle, yet interesting,
difference between them. The first component strongly reflected the concept of
purchasing gifts to bring back from the holiday, as recognition of the period spent away
from normal existence. This aspect reflects the role of reintegration (Gordon, 1986). The
17
second component reflected the role of the souvenir as a substitute for special occasion
gifts, such as Christmas and birthdays. Despite this slight division in the motivations for
purchase, the majority of consumers purchase souvenirs as a gift for others. Souvenir
retailers need to recognize that they are not providing souvenirs for the purchaser, but for
an alternative consumer.
This also provides important understanding for retailers as the products tourists
may buy for their own consumption will be different from the products they buy as gifts.
As a result, retailers need to reposition the product range to reflect the role of the souvenir
as a gift, and to enhance the motivations for tourists to purchase products in this context
by identifying appropriateness as gifts amongst the products available. Although there is
some gender effect, there is strong support and recognition by both sexes for the souvenir
as a gift. There is an opportunity here for further research into the difference in the types
of products bought as self gifts and as gifts for others. The importance should be noted
here, especially for males, of vacation souvenirs as substitutes for Christmas and birthday
presents.
Fourthly, there was strong support amongst all respondents for the role of the
souvenir as an aide memoire, and this would support previous research (Zauberman,
Ratner, and Kim 2009). It is important that destinations and retailers identify what it is
tourists want to be reminded of on their return home. The lack of support for buying
named products and non-regional products clearly suggests that tourists want meaningful
reminders, as opposed to the more novelty focused products reflecting the destination.
However, the hierarchical regression analysis identified that the role of the souvenir as an
aide memoire was subservient to the role as evidence.
18
Fifthly, the importance of the souvenir as evidence, both for the tourist and as a
means of communicating their experiences with others, is an important finding. This
finding reflects and supports previous work that recognizes the role of the souvenir, not
only as an aid to memory but also as a means to prove the experience (Gordon 1986;
Swanson 2004; Littrell et al. 1994). The use of souvenirs as conversation pieces and as
evidence of travel experiences clearly reflects the importance of travel experiences in the
construction of the self and as status consumption products. This finding is of importance
for destination marketers and retailers as it clarifies how consumers use souvenirs to
enhance themselves and their travel experiences. The opportunity to use souvenirs that
might encourage envy amongst people who have not experienced the destination could
prove to be a powerful marketing tool and marketers should look at the development of
souvenirs that reflect aspirational experiences for travelers. The hierarchical regression
clearly identifies the importance of evidence as the main purchase decision influencer.
Although the importance of the other dimensions is evident from the strength of the
agreement with the individual scale items, the importance of the dimensions of memory
and gift are clearly secondary to that of evidence.
Finally, there are both a number of limitations to the research and opportunities for
future research. A specific limitation of the research relates to the sample. Firstly, this
was a convenience sample and secondly, it comprised, in the main, respondents from one
country, namely Australia. Although, given the almost universal purchase of souvenirs by
tourists from Western countries, a convenience sample may be valid representation of the
population, there is opportunity for future research to adopt a more stringent sampling
19
approach to test the findings. Equally, there is a need to extend the research to other
countries, and especially non-Western cultures.
As previously identified in this paper, there is a paucity of research into the
purchase motivation and usage of souvenirs, as opposed to the types, uses and functions.
There are a number of opportunities for further research that arise from the finding in this
research. As an example, the role of the souvenir as evidence provides opportunity for
research on the links to destination choice, travel behaviour and status consumption. The
multiple roles of the souvenir as gift, as evidence and as an aid to memory also provides
opportunity for further research.
20
References
Aguinis, Herman. 1995. Statistical power problems with moderated multiple regression in
management research. Journal of Management 21 (6):1141-1158.
Anderson, Luella, and Mary Littrell. 1996. Group profiles of women as tourists and
purchasers of souvenirs. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal 25
(1):28 - 55.
Bagozzi, Richard P, and Todd F Heatherton. 1994. A general approach to representing
multifaceted personality constructs: Application to state self-esteem. Structural
Equation Modelling 1 (1):35-67.
Bagozzi, Richard P., Youjae Yi, and Lynn W Phillips. 1991. Assessing Construct Validity
in Organizational Research. Administrative Science Quarterly 36 (3):421-458.
Churchill, Gilbert A., Jr. 1979. A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing
constructs. Journal of Marketing Research 16 (1):64-73.
Coley, Amanda, and Brigitte Burgess. 2003. Gender differences in cognitive and affective
impulse buying. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management 7 (3):282 - 295.
Dittmara, Helga, Jane Beattieb, and Susanne Frieseb. 1995. Gender identity and material
symbols: Objects and decision considerations in impulse purchases Journal of
Economic Psychology 16 (3):491-511.
Fairhurst, Ann, Carol Costello, and Alycia Fogle Holmes. 2007. An examination of
shopping behavior of visitors to Tennessee according to tourist typologies. Journal
of Vacation Marketing 13 (4):311-320.
———. 2007. An examination of shopping behavior of visitors to Tennessee according to
tourist typologies. Journal of Vacation Marketing 13 (4):320-320.
21
Fornell, Claes, and David F. Larcker. 1981. Evaluating Structural Equation Models with
Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research
18 (1):39-50.
Francis, Glenda. 2004. Introduction to SPSS for Windows. Frenchs Forest: Pearson
Education Australia.
Gordon, Beverly. 1986. The souvenir: Messenger of the extraordinary. Journal of Popular
Culture 20 (3):135-151.
Graburn, Nelson H H. 1989. Tourism: The sacred journey. In Hosts and Guests, edited by
V. L. Smith. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Hair, Joseph, F, Jr., Rolph E Anderson, Ronald L Tatham, and William Black, C. 1998.
Multivariate Data Analysis. Edited by D. Borkowsky. 5th ed. Englewood Cliffs,
New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Johnson, R Burke , and Anthony J Onwuegbuzie. 2004. Mixed Methods Research: A
Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come. Educational Researcher 33 (7):14-26.
Kim, Soyoung , and M A Littrell. 2001. Souvenir buying intentions for self versus others.
Annals of Tourism Research 28 (3):638-657.
Lehto, Xinran Y, Liping A Cai, Joseph T O'Leary, and Tzung-Cheng Huan. 2004. Tourist
shopping preferences and expenditure behaviours: The case of the Taiwanese
outbound market. Journal of Vacation Marketing 10 (4):320-332.
Littrell, Mary Ann, Luella F. Anderson, and Pamela J. Brown. 1993. What makes a craft
souvenir authentic? Annals of Tourism Research 20:197-215.
22
Littrell, Mary Ann, Suzanne Baizerman, Rita Kean, Sherry Gahring, Shirley Niemeyer,
Rae Reilly, and JaneAnn Stout. 1994. Souvenirs and tourism styles. Journal of
Travel Research 33 (1):3-11.
Love, Lisa L, and Peter S. Sheldon. 1998. Souvenirs: Messengers of Meaning. Paper read
at Advances in Consumer Research.
MacCannell, Dean. 1989. The tourist : A new theory of the leisure class. 2nd ed. New
York: Schocken Books.
Marsh, Herbert W., John R. Balla, and Roderick P. McDonald. 1988. Goodness-of-Fit
Indexes in Confirmatory Factor Analysis: The Effect of Sample Size.
Psychological Bulletin 103 (3):391-410.
Neuman, W Lawrence. 2003. Social research methods: Qualitative and quantatative
approaches. Edited by J. Lasser. 5th ed. Boston: Pearson Education.
Pedhazur, E J. 1997. Multiple regression in behavioral research : Explanation and
prediction. 3rd ed. Forth Worth: Harcourt Brace.
Reisinger, Yvette, and Felix Mavondo. 2001. Gender Differences In The Psychographic
Profiles Of The Youth Travel Market. Paper read at Travel and Tourism Research
Association, October 14-16, 2001, at Niagara Falls, Canada.
Shenhav-Keller, Shelly. 1993. The Israeli souvenir: Its text and context. Annals of
Tourism Research 20:182-196.
Swain, Margaret Byrne. 1995. Gender in Tourism Annals of Tourism Research 22
(2):247-266
Swanson, Kristen K. 2004. Tourists' and retailers' perceptions of souvenirs. Journal of
Vacation Marketing 10 (4):363-377.
23
Swanson, Kristen K, and Patricia E Horridge. 2004. A Structural Model for Souvenir
Consumption, Travel Activities, and Tourist Demographics. Journal of Travel
Research 42 (4):372-380.
Swanson, Kristen K., and Patricia E. Horridge. 2006. Travel motivations as souvenir
purchase indicators Tourism Management 27 (4):671-683.
Tabachnick, Barbara G, and Linda S Fidell. 2001. Using Multivariate Statistics. 4th ed.
Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Tashakkori, Abbas, and Charles Teddlie. 2003. Issues and dilemmas in teaching research
methods courses in social and behavioural sciences: US perspective International
Journal of Social Research Methodology 6 (1):61 - 77.
Ward, Cheryl B, and Thuhang Tran. 2007. Consumer Gifting Behaviors: One for You,
One for Me? Services Marketing Quarterly 29 (2):1-17.
Zalatan, Antoine 1998. Wives' involvement in tourism decision processes Annals of
Tourism Research 25 (4):890-903.
Zauberman, Gal, Rebecca K. Ratner, and B. Kyu Kim. 2009. Memories as Assets:
Strategic Memory Protection in Choice over Time. Journal of Consumer Research
35 (5):715-728.
24
Table 1: Confirmatory Factor Analysis Fit Indices
Dimension Norm
χ2 DF P χ2 AGFI CFI RMSEA SRMR
Full Construct 8.36 6 0.213 1.39 0.968 0.998 0.035 0.014
Gift 4.54 2 0.103 2.27 0.963 0.993 0.065 0.018
Memory 4.78 2 0.092 2.39 0.962 0.996 0.068 0.014
Evidence 10.27 5 0.068 2.05 0.960 0.988 0.059 0.026
Table 2: Souvenir Purchase Frequency.
Photographs,
postcards and
paintings of the
region
Hats, caps or
other clothing
branded with
the destination,
hotel or
attraction
Other items
representative
of the location
/ destination,
such as key
rings /chains,
fridge magnets,
mugs
Regional
specialty arts
and crafts, such
as carvings,
jewellery,
glassware
Non-regional
arts and crafts,
such as
paintings,
stuffed animals
or toys,
ornaments
Other local
specialty
products, such
as regional
food products,
wine, clothing
Published
material on the
destination /
region, such as
books,
magazines
Perfume,
electrical
goods, cameras
or other similar
goods that can
be purchased at
a discounted
price
M
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
Always
15.7
27.8
3.4
3.7
6.9
10.2
6.6
17.2
1.4
3.2
9.0
14.5
5.0
6.9
11.6
13.2
Often
27.9
32.1
14.4
13.3
19.7
24.0
28.5
39.3
8.5
11.9
34.4
38.2
22.0
21.4
27.9
24.5
Occasionally
34.6
28.9
30.6
29.1
35.7
32.9
36.5
31.0
22.5
27.0
38.2
32.2
36.4
33.6
33.4
32.2
Rarely
18.1
8.7
32.6
33.0
27.0
21.7
21.7
10.0
41.4
36.9
14.3
11.8
27.3
25.9
19.9
21.3
Never
3.7
2.5
19.0
20.9
10.7
11.2
6.7
2.5
26.2
20.9
4.1
3.3
9.3
12.2
7.2
8.8
Total
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
26
Table 3: Souvenir Purchases
Item
Mean
f value Sig.
Male
Female
Photographs, postcards and paintings of the region
3.34
3.74
94.046
.000
Other local specialty products, such as regional food products, wine,
clothing 3.30 3.49
23.279
.000
Perfume, electrical goods, cameras or other similar goods that can be
purchased at a discounted price 3.17 3.12
1.175
.279
Regional specialty arts and crafts, such as carvings, jewellery, glassware
3.07
3.59
177.929
.000
Published material on the destination / region, such as books, magazines
2.86
2.85
.055
.814
Other items representative of the location / destination, such as key rings
/chains, fridge magnets, mugs 2.85 3.00
11.454
.001
Hats, caps or other clothing branded with the destination, hotel or
attraction 2.51 2.46
1.205
.272
Non-regional arts and crafts, such as paintings, stuffed animals or toys,
ornaments 2.17 2.39
30.072
.000
Multivariate results: Wilks’ Lambda Value .912; F 38.584; Sig .000 Degrees of freedom: 1,3198
27
Table 4: Souvenirs as Gifts
Item
Comp
1
Comp
2
Mean
f value
Sig.
Male
Female
The item makes a good gift
0.741
5.43
5.75
50.995
.000
Buying souvenirs for others shows that you are thinking
of them 0.827 5.16 5.52 53.859 .000
I generally buy gifts for my family or friends
0.706
5.14
5.52
47.562
.000
I buy souvenirs as a gift to take when staying with
family and friends overseas or interstate. 0.547 4.32 4.75 0.138 .000
I like to buy souvenirs that I can give to family or
friends as gifts for special occasions 0.929 4.37 4.34 43.108 .710
I like to buy souvenirs that can be used as Christmas or
birthday presents 0.954 4.05 4.10 0.606 .436
I like to exchange souvenirs with relatives
0.508
3.31
3.64
24.683
.000
Multivariate results: Wilks’ Lambda Value .963; F 17.743; Sig .000 Degrees of freedom: 1,3198
28
Table 5: Souvenirs as Memories
Item
Mean
f value
Sig.
Male
Female
Souvenirs allow me to have a memento of where I've been
5.43
5.89
96.913
.000
I like to buy souvenirs that represent the country I visited.
5.40
5.75
57.347
.000
Souvenirs are a reminder of how special my travel experiences were
5.34
5.78
80.037
.000
I buy souvenirs that create an association with the place that I visited.
5.16
5.56
70.224
.000
The souvenirs I buy bring connection to my trip
5.07
5.40
39.800
.000
Souvenirs bring back the travel experience.
5.05
5.43
53.169
.000
Multivariate results: Wilks’ Lambda Value .967; F 18.417; Sig .000 Degrees of freedom: 1,3198
29
Table 6: Souvenirs as Evidence
Item
Mean
f value
Sig.
Male
Female
I like to buy souvenirs that identify where I've been.
5.22
5.47
26.959
.000
I like souvenirs that you can talk about with others.
4.90
5.02
4.281
.039
Buying souvenirs gives you the opportunity to share your experience with
others 4.86 5.17 31.979 .000
I like to buy souvenirs that are famous from a particular place.
4.70
4.91
13.677
.000
I like to put my souvenirs on display to show the places I've visited
4.44
4.70
17.754
.000
I like to buy souvenirs so that I can decorate my home or office with
artifacts from other countries. 4.43 4.59 6.773 .009
Multivariate results: Wilks’ Lambda Value .986; F 7.332; Sig .000 Degrees of freedom: 1,3198
30
Table 7: Hierarchical regression results
Gender
Model R R Square
R Square
Change F Change
Sig. F
Change
Male
1
.477a
.228
.228
252.945
.000
2
.514b
.264
.036
42.454
.000
3
.517c
.268
.003
4.040
.045
Female
1
.490a
.240
.240
739.920
.000
2
.521b
.271
.031
98.057
.000
3
.533c
.284
.013
41.059
.000
a. Predictors: (Constant), evidence
b. Predictors: (Constant), evidence, gift
c. Predictors: (Constant), evidence, gift, memory
